Canon 1dxmark ii or R6 for sports?

Which would be your pick?

James Crockett wrote in post #19153407
Which would be your pick?

Which sport? Formula 1, crown-green bowls, or anything in-between.

john crossley wrote in post #19153449
Which sport? Formula 1, crown-green bowls, or anything in-between.

football, baseball, basketball, softball, soccer

Haven't tried the R6, but I prefer the 1D-series bodies. When I tested the R5, it just couldn't quite keep up like the 1D's can.

James Crockett wrote in post #19153407
Which would be your pick?

Personally I'd opt for the top shelf weather sealing and monster battery of the 1D series for this purpose for the outside spots you just mentioned. I'm not sure the high ISO performance is significantly different, but that also plays into this, which one will AF is low light best will matter perhaps to you for indoor sports (basketball?), and if you're ok with the noise at ISO 12,800 and up, where your camera will live in doors at minimum.

Very best,

huntersdad wrote in post #19153477
Haven't tried the R6, but I prefer the 1D-series bodies. When I tested the R5, it just couldn't quite keep up like the 1D's can.

The R6 could not keep up in regards to FPS or AF or where was it lacking? I am interested in FF body but torn between a DSLR or the R6

duckster wrote in post #19174472
The R6 could not keep up in regards to FPS or AF or where was it lacking? I am interested in FF body but torn between a DSLR or the R6

I have the 1dx and the R6 now. I love the 1dx body but the dynamic range of the R6 is awesome! I don’t miss the 2fps difference and I have shot some in ES with the 20fps, too much. I do have the grip on my R6 but it doesn’t feel as rugged as the 1d bodies. If I was going out the door and had to choose one, it would be the R6. Good luck

duckster wrote in post #19174472
The R6 could not keep up in regards to FPS or AF or where was it lacking? I am interested in FF body but torn between a DSLR or the R6

AF. R5 was the same. For some reason, it can lock for a shot and then goes crazy grabbing other stuff for a shot or two, back to the swimmer, crazy, and so on. One of the easiest strokes to shoot is breast stroke and it can't do it at 100%. 1DxIII hammers that stroke.

Outside of that, both cameras are a lot of fun to use. The eye AF is spot on 9/10 times, and the 10th time it grabs the head. Speed is fine. But the AF for my sports use isn't there.

huntersdad wrote in post #19185843
AF. R5 was the same. For some reason, it can lock for a shot and then goes crazy grabbing other stuff for a shot or two, back to the swimmer, crazy, and so on. One of the easiest strokes to shoot is breast stroke and it can't do it at 100%. 1DxIII hammers that stroke.

Outside of that, both cameras are a lot of fun to use. The eye AF is spot on 9/10 times, and the 10th time it grabs the head. Speed is fine. But the AF for my sports use isn't there.

That is interesting information

I'm going to withdraw my statement about the R5 not being able to handle sports, but not fully. I will say that if it is a shot I have to get, I will defer to my 1DxIII.

However, after talking with several birders on here as well as a couple other sites, and making some changes to both my case mode and AF mode, I was able to get a much higher hit rate. Still a little under my 1DxIII, but getting very close.

The last issue I need to conquer, and why I believe the 1DxIII outperforms it (and the 1DxII), is the speed of initial acquisition. The R5 is much slower in that area, so I am working to try and find a way to speed it up.

IQ between the 2 is pretty even and, surprisingly, when the R5 is used in crop mode, which I do frequently, it remains on par.

I would think the R6 would operate similar until the crop mode part.

I think a big factor is going to be the lenses you have or will use with it. There is a very select group of EF lenses with which the full 12 FPS mechanical shutter is achieved. If you have have one of the version 1 IS lenses you could be topping out at way less than 12 FPS. Doesn’t seem the 1DX’s have that limitation.

Where can one find the list of lenses that will support full 12 fps?

I'm looking at the 1DX2 as my escalation for ergonomics, but also because it just has the proven track record of eating everything you throw at it.

Bought a R6 and can attest that the eye/face tracking is a absolute game changer for sports.

I've found that most cameras can't shoot their rated fps when shooting a moving object. They may be able to capture images that fast... when you take the need to refocus between shots... but that is the real world. I know that the A1 nor A9 from Sony can - and they have the latest and greatest long lenses on them. You just can't reposition elements that fast. Fixed focus... sure.. but not in AF mode on a subject moving around a lot.

But... I also know that the 1D series did provide performance relative to other canons that was faster. In canon world I went from 3, to 6, to 8 then 12 when I finally bailed on Canon. And in each case, the cameras were truly faster than their predecessor. A lot of long Canon glass on the EF mount leverages older generation tech to focus. So they will slow your camera down.

Its all relative. Not bashing Canon at all. But you'll never see a true 12 fps using servo mode. Physics just prevent it. But in most cases they are still way up to the task of getting really good shots.