1Dx Mark III or EOS R5?

I'm going to be looking to add to my arsenal soon and I'm wondering what you would do in my place. I currently have 5D4 and EOS R. I'm waivering between buying the 1DxIII and the (hopefully soon to be released) EOS R5.

I primarily shoot wildlife, birds in flight, nature, landscape. I rarely, if ever, shoot video. Would love to hear your opinions.

I'm leaning towards the R5, but until the announcement next week, we won't know the final specs on it. I'm probably going to wait until later in the year and see some reviews. For reference, I have a 5d4 and a 7d2. The 7d2 is the one getting replaced.

I shoot more sports than anything, so the thought of 45mp files didn't appeal to me and I went with 2 1DxIIIs. Thus far, I have been completely pleased and have no issue with the decision.

When the R5 was first announced, I was talking to Canon rep who made the comment that the R5 will be a 5D4 replacement - not the 1D -series. As such, he said there was likely no way, in his mind, that the R5 would have the focusing power of the 1D-series cameras, especially given that releasing a camera that beat out their $6500 flagship after a lot of pros had just bought the flagship would be in very bad taste and likely burn a lot of bridges. I thought about that and kind see his point and filed that under things to think about.

That said, this conversation was prior to Covid, so things in the mind of Canon may have changed.

Thank you, both, for your input. I agree with you, Huntersdad. I was in my local camera shop when the Canon rep brought in the 1DXIII and he pretty much said the same thing - R5 will basically be a mirrorless 5D.

There are those who worry that buying a Canon dslr now makes no sense, since Canon is putting so much focus on mirrorless development. But as I see it, this would probably be the last camera I would ever buy. And with the EF lens investment I already have, I think I'd be all set.

I'm pretty sure I've made my decision. Now just have to find $6,000 lying around. Anybody want to help with that?

You don't have to shoot at 45 when you don't want to. You can shoot SRAW or MRAW, etc. But when you need that 45 for more effective reach or cropping ability, the R5 will have it. There have been many times where I have shot sports from one zone across to another, and more resolution has always been good.

I shoot birds, BIF and wildlife primarily with occasional landscape and others. I loved my previous 5D III when I had it, but I upgraded to 5D IV so I can crop more without compromising IQ. The upgrade made a tremendous difference. I'm now looking at R5 for even greater crop-ability as long as its AF doesn't disappoint. Going mirrorless doesn't mean you'd have to sacrifice all the Canon lens investment.

"I have shot sports from one zone across to another, and more resolution has always been good."

Whole heartadly agree.... so long as you have lenses that will capitalize on that extra refining ability. Not all my are up to the task.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19088252
There have been many times where I have shot sports from one zone across to another, and more resolution has always been good.

This is my primary motivation for more megapixels. I currently have a 7D2 and a 5D3 which I use with a 100-400 II. When I shoot my daughter's soccer games, I have to crop a lot at the far end of the field. While the 7D2 gives more "reach", I prefer the overall IQ of the 5D3 images, even after the extra cropping required to match framing. The R5 is the natural answer to getting more pixels on target but I wonder how the R6 would compare to my current cameras. It has 2MP less than the 5D3 and no 1.6x crop factor of the 7D2, but I wonder if it resolves more detail due to a better AA filter. And of course the far superior R6 AF system would result in more tack sharp images. So maybe the R6 still comes out ahead for heavily cropped images despite the megapixel disadvantage. But the fields will only be getting bigger if she keeps going, so it's back to more megapixels with the R5. It's a lot of money though.

Have you considered the 90d? An apsc yet more resolution than the 7d.

90D, EOS R, or 5D4 might be good alternatives to consider. I have and do shoot sports with the latter two myself.

Well, after watching yesterday's official announcement from Canon, now I think I'm leaning more toward the R5. 45 mp, 12 fps mechanical/20 fps electronic shutter, the auto focus system and the in-camera stabilization all appeal to me. And much less $ than 1dxiii. For nearly the same price, I could get the R5 and the new RF 100-500 mm zoom.

If you don't need 45Mpx and could use the resolution from the 1dx3, the R6 might be a better value for you. It only lacks the top display, has a lower resolution viewfinder, lower video options than the R5, and 20Mpx.

mike_d wrote in post #19091307
This is my primary motivation for more megapixels. I currently have a 7D2 and a 5D3 which I use with a 100-400 II. When I shoot my daughter's soccer games, I have to crop a lot at the far end of the field. While the 7D2 gives more "reach", I prefer the overall IQ of the 5D3 images, even after the extra cropping required to match framing. The R5 is the natural answer to getting more pixels on target but I wonder how the R6 would compare to my current cameras. It has 2MP less than the 5D3 and no 1.6x crop factor of the 7D2, but I wonder if it resolves more detail due to a better AA filter. And of course the far superior R6 AF system would result in more tack sharp images. So maybe the R6 still comes out ahead for heavily cropped images despite the megapixel disadvantage. But the fields will only be getting bigger if she keeps going, so it's back to more megapixels with the R5. It's a lot of money though.

I shoot motorsports without credentials. Even with my 100-400, there are times I need to crop. My 80D allows a fair bit of cropping but loses detail quick. Started looking at 1DXII and 5D4. Then the R5 official specs have been spilled. I'm very interested in that! I just wonder how well it works with adapted ef lenses. Also I'd like some reviews on how well the af works with sports. Luckily I dont plan to buy any camera till next spring. Needless to say 2020, not a good year for anything. Least of all photography.

I pre-ordered the R5 because of the ability to crop. I appreciate that the ISO and battery performance wont be at the 1DX3 level (more like ISO 3000-5000 vs 6000-12000). From what I understand it is supposed to be a stop better in DR than the 5D4 and the AF in the R5 seems very much improved. Focus points are supposed to cover the entire or close to the entire sensor. The IBIS at 5-8 stops is really nice capability. The R5 made sense for now, but realize I may need a better lower light camera. The R6 is a possibility but I was already struggling with not having a large "more solid body" in buying the R5, so I dont think the R6 would make me happy. The overheating concerns are irrelevant to me as I dont shoot much video. Rolling shutter is an issue with all 3. I want to see what an R1 looks like.

neurorx wrote in post #19093903
I pre-ordered the R5 because of the ability to crop. I appreciate that the ISO and battery performance wont be at the 1DX3 level (more like ISO 3000-5000 vs 6000-12000). From what I understand it is supposed to be a stop better in DR than the 5D4 and the AF in the R5 seems very much improved. Focus points are supposed to cover the entire or close to the entire sensor. The IBIS at 5-8 stops is really nice capability. The R5 made sense for now, but realize I may need a better lower light camera. The R6 is a possibility but I was already struggling with not having a large "more solid body" in buying the R5, so I dont think the R6 would make me happy. The overheating concerns are irrelevant to me as I dont shoot much video. Rolling shutter is an issue with all 3. I want to see what an R1 looks like.

With 5-8 stops of ibis plus is on a lens. ISO shouldn't be an issue as you'll be able to shoot stupid slow ss! In theory anyway. I guess also depends what your shooting. I also take issue with the much smaller body. But to deal with that the camera has to blow me away. So far everything I've seen is doing that.

Cormac wrote in post #19093878
I shoot motorsports without credentials. Even with my 100-400, there are times I need to crop. My 80D allows a fair bit of cropping but loses detail quick. Started looking at 1DXII and 5D4. Then the R5 official specs have been spilled. I'm very interested in that! I just wonder how well it works with adapted ef lenses. Also I'd like some reviews on how well the af works with sports. Luckily I dont plan to buy any camera till next spring. Needless to say 2020, not a good year for anything. Least of all photography.

I think the 7D and 80D are similar in that respect. The small pixels just don't hold up as well and lack a certain clarity and pop I'm come to enjoy with the 5D3.

Money aside, I probably won't be buying anything for a while either. I don't really have much to shoot nowadays.