Upgrade from 5D Mark II: 5D Mark IV or EOS R?

I have a 5D Mark II (great camera) and a new SL2 for travel (liking it very much). I THINK I want to upgrade my 5D MKII to a 5D Mark IV for more autofocus points and an extended ISO range for my microstock photos. I am very used to the 5D series so the IV seems like it would be an easy upgrade. However, when I read through the EOS R thread I am struck by how much people seem to like that camera, and I wonder if that would be a better choice. I have read and re-read through the specs and reviews for both cameras on various websites, but I am still torn. I would appreciate input -- pros and cons. My main interests are landscapes, wildlife (local waterfowl or zoo/aquarium creatures), macros, family photos, sunsets, & local (not airline) travel. Not interested in sports or video. I'm just an amateur/hobbyist but I have always found that having the right tool for the job increases enjoyment and significantly lessens frustration! Thanks.

As an owner of both, I Think the R gets my vote.

That said, I don’t think it measures up to my 5D4’s weather sealing and fast-action AF, so if your wildlife photos involve BIF you may want to lean toward the DSLR.

I will be very honest with you though, even with my lenses dialed in through AFMA on the 5D4, I am almost finding a whole new life on my amazing L glass with the R simply because of its DPAF. For static or slow-moving subjects, it simply nails the AF in a way my 5D4 does not.

Yes, I was at the lake the other day and missed every shot of a beautiful blue heron that landed and took off several times, but that may have been, in part, due to a lens limitation as well a camera limitation.

I have enjoyed the DPAF on my little SL2; it is very convenient to just touch the part of the screen you want to focus on. For some reason I thought the MK IV had that; guess I was mistaken.

Still thinking. . .

ozziepuppy wrote in post #18739534
Yes, I was at the lake the other day and missed every shot of a beautiful blue heron that landed and took off several times, but that may have been, in part, due to a lens limitation as well a camera limitation.

I have enjoyed the DPAF on my little SL2; it is very convenient to just touch the part of the screen you want to focus on. For some reason I thought the MK IV had that; guess I was mistaken.

Still thinking. . .

It does have it in live view. It’s one of the reasons I was initially excited when the R was announced. The touch to focus/shoot on the 5D4’s live view mode worked better for some situations than when using the viewfinder (again based on my experience). With the R, you have the same level of accuracy when choosing an AF point and shooting through the viewfinder or you can use the excellent flip screen and touch to focus/shoot.

cueball wrote in post #18739571
It does have it in live view. It’s one of the reasons I was initially excited when the R was announced. The touch to focus/shoot on the 5D4’s live view mode worked better for some situations than when using the viewfinder (again based on my experience). With the R, you have the same level of accuracy when choosing an AF point and shooting through the viewfinder or you can use the excellent flip screen and touch to focus/shoot.

OK great, I thought that the Mark IV had it in live view.

I'm having trouble wrapping my head around the EVF on the R. I may have to try to see it in person. I have never used an EVF.

It changes you

My problem was that I always wanted the performance of my Canon gear with the EVF experience of my former Olympus kit. Now I finally have it. It’s really awesome to see exactly how your setting choices impact your exposure in real-time. The coverage area for AF also provides more compositional opportunities. I highly suggest trying to rent it or find a local retailer to play around/test it.

My first DSLR was a 5Dc. I didn't upgrade to the II because it had the same AF as the 5D (which was one of the main limiting factors I found about it). I then did upgrade to the 5D3, and fell in love with its AF. The DR was just enough that I also found I didn't see as much noise when raising shadows with my given exposures. I upgraded to the 5D4 before the Canon R announcement, but I have no buyers remorse. From what I have read, the Canon R's sensor may be a bit more compressed from the 5D4, and for overall features it's still not at the level as the 5D4. When it comes to DPAF, the 5D4 is also good: I just recently tried the remote wifi app, and had no problems with touching the area of the screen I wanted in focus. However, the Canon R is also substantially cheaper...and when you consider that, it is a very good price point. It has a sensor similar to the 5D4, and is just slightly more expensive then the 6D2 (which has AF points just in the center and sensor performance everyone bemoans).

I switched out my SL2 to the M50, so I can try out Canon mirrorless and EVF. It is a game changer for manual focusing and seeing your exposure real-time.

Right now the IV is not super significantly higher than the R because it is on sale for $400 off plus you get >$100 in "free" stuff (extra battery, etc. at B&H anyway) bringing it to under (effectively) $3000 (approx $2980 from a reputable site, not from the ones purporting to sell it for $2150); the R would be $2299 plus $64 for the extra battery (a necessity) plus $199 for the control ring adapter, so about $2562 -- so about $400 difference I guess, but then there would be the temptation to also get at least one of the R lenses. . .(let's be honest, the temptation is real!). I actually tend to think the IV might be less expensive overall (especially since I would feel obligated to sell my II if I got a IV, but if I got the R I would want to keep my II, if that makes any sense).

"It changes you"---> I could use some changing. Seriously, I probably do need to see it/them in a store. I hate to keep looking at things in a store and then buying them online (did that with the SL2, seems rude) but I do think I need to go and look at things in person.

Thanks for the input.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18739678
I switched out my SL2 to the M50, so I can try out Canon mirrorless and EVF. It is a game changer for manual focusing and seeing your exposure real-time.

Yes TeamSpeed, I can't believe you did that! You were the reason I even considered, & then ended up with, the SL2, LOL! Did you sell your SL2 or did you keep it? I like mine a lot, so no regrets there.

I also looked at the M50 when I was considering the G7 X II & the SL2 for a small travel camera; it seemed like a very nice camera as well (although the salesperson kept pushing me toward Sony mirrorless because he predicted that Canon would not continue to support the type of lens mount on the M50 due to the R being out & having a different kind of mount--it was somewhat confusing). Sounds like you really like the M50!

Hopefully tomorrow I can check out the EVF.

ozziepuppy wrote in post #18739687
Yes TeamSpeed, I can't believe you did that! You were the reason I even considered, & then ended up with, the SL2, LOL! Did you sell your SL2 or did you keep it? I like mine a lot, so no regrets there.

I also looked at the M50 when I was considering the G7 X II & the SL2 for a small travel camera; it seemed like a very nice camera as well (although the salesperson kept pushing me toward Sony mirrorless because he predicted that Canon would not continue to support the type of lens mount on the M50 due to the R being out & having a different kind of mount--it was somewhat confusing). Sounds like you really like the M50!

Hopefully tomorrow I can check out the EVF.

After reading the reviews on the M50 and checking it out locally, I sold the SL2. The M50 is even smaller, but handles nearly identically. With the kit lens, the camera is so small, it fits in my coat pocket. Also with the $250 50mm 1.2 manual lens, the two together are an awesome duo. The peak focus works so well.

Love the manual focusing, there is nothing like it on the DSLR front, even with live view and using the 5X. I have been taking the M50 with me everywhere, where I didn't so much with the SL2. This is just a "more funner" combination!

TeamSpeed wrote in post #18739692
After reading the reviews on the M50 and checking it out locally, I sold the SL2. The M50 is even smaller, but handles nearly identically. With the kit lens, the camera is so small, it fits in my coat pocket. Also with the $250 50mm 1.2 manual lens, the two together are an awesome duo. The peak focus works so well.

Love the manual focusing, there is nothing like it on the DSLR front, even with live view and using the 5X. I have been taking the M50 with me everywhere, where I didn't so much with the SL2. Just a more funner combination!

Hosted photo: posted by TeamSpeed in
./showthread.php?p=187​39692&i=i261487821
forum: Camera Vs. Camera

Hosted photo: posted by TeamSpeed in
./showthread.php?p=187​39692&i=i118785191
forum: Camera Vs. Camera

Beautiful photos!

Thank you, focus peaking makes manual focus on the eyes so very easy.

ozziepuppy wrote in post #18739287
I have a 5D Mark II (great camera) and a new SL2 for travel (liking it very much). I THINK I want to upgrade my 5D MKII to a 5D Mark IV for more autofocus points and an extended ISO range for my microstock photos. I am very used to the 5D series so the IV seems like it would be an easy upgrade. However, when I read through the EOS R thread I am struck by how much people seem to like that camera, and I wonder if that would be a better choice. I have read and re-read through the specs and reviews for both cameras on various websites, but I am still torn. I would appreciate input -- pros and cons. My main interests are landscapes, wildlife (local waterfowl or zoo/aquarium creatures), macros, family photos, sunsets, & local (not airline) travel. Not interested in sports or video. I'm just an amateur/hobbyist but I have always found that having the right tool for the job increases enjoyment and significantly lessens frustration! Thanks.

I have tested EOS R just few days ago and was amazed how much i didnt like. Coming from something like 5D form factor, EOS R is a nightmare. Now if you are a slow paced shooter and dont do any events or fast paced stuff ... yes you can use it. But ergonomics are far superior on 80D let alone on any 5D ever. EOS R ergonomics are more headed toward heavy use of touch screen. Want to change something? Take Your eye off and use touch screen. Dont get me wrong there is an option to press M. FN button then scroll till you get what you want, then press SET then scroll till you changed THAT setting then press another button to fix it. So its really not made with fast paced in mind. Also i hoped to see sooo many sharp photos ... because new AF should be AWESOME !! From my experience it i not as sharp as im used to. Well ... it may be sharp, i just wasnt able to adjust as quickly and get super sharp photos.

In hind sight 5D mk4 is just superior professional camera.

I would go the 5D mk IV. Reason being is the EOS R is a first gen camera, a great first gen but it still isnt as polished as it could be. I am kind of in the same boat waiting since they are incredible cameras. I am just holding out to the EOS R mk II or at least a firmware update that fixes a lot of the complaints about it.