Canon EOS R5 Unite and Discuss!

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19163639
Cyberdyne

Sound like your impressed with the R5. would you say it is a good replacement for my 5DIV? a question on it to replace my 90D, since the 90D is 32 mp (APS-C) and would be an effective roughly 75mm full frame, and the R5 I heard is 17 mp at APS-C, if I was doing a really tight crop of a bird 200+ yards away, which would give better resuts assuming the same sharpness? I guess I am asking would it also replace the 90D for when I am shooting across the pond

The R5 has no miracle cure for anything but AF, in focal-length-limited situations. As I've already said, it offers nothing over the 90D, IQ-wise, if stability and focus are had with the 90D, with the same optics, and cropping from the R5. I am using the R5 for bird photography over the 90D, not for maximum IQ, but for the R5's AF ability to lock onto a target and stay on it. The R5 AFes better at 800/8 than my 90D AFes at 560/5.6 in many situations, which I why I am using the R5. I'd rather have this R5 AF with the 90D sensor, if that were possible.

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19163639
Cyberdyne

Sound like your impressed with the R5. would you say it is a good replacement for my 5DIV? a question on it to replace my 90D, since the 90D is 32 mp (APS-C) and would be an effective roughly 75mm full frame, and the R5 I heard is 17 mp at APS-C, if I was doing a really tight crop of a bird 200+ yards away, which would give better resuts assuming the same sharpness? I guess I am asking would it also replace the 90D for when I am shooting across the pond

Don't know about 90D, I've never shot one, and there are many here that are more concerned about the whole pixels on target issue that might have more of a formed opinion.

It's early for me to post an opinion about such comparisons,. even vs. 5D4, but it sure seems like an upgrade. More MP sensor, at least as good DR, much faster frame rate, and simply unreal autofocus. It sure seems to me on this initial impression that it will be able to replace a 1DXIII and a 5D4,. but as I mentioned above, too early to tell based on really one outing and some around the house/yard playing about.

If you are really looking for my opinion on what YOU should do? I don't usually say "wait," but;

Since you are in the crowd that desires pixels on target above all else, and both your 90D and 5D4 are less than a year old, you might want to wait and see if Canon announces an APS-C version with the pixel density you enjoy in the 90D. There is no way a 17mp cropped image is going to offer the same detail and crop-ability that your 90D's 32MP offers. The only way it can compete is if you increase your focal length. We'd need to compare FOV, but maybe R5 with 800mm f/11 is about the pixels on target as you are shooting with the 90D?

Maybe an "R7" with the 90D sensor, (or denser) and the R5/R6 AF will be in the future?

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19163669
Don't know about 90D, I've never shot one, and there are many here that are more concerned about the whole pixels on target issue that might have more of a formed opinion.

It's early for me to post an opinion about such comparisons,. even vs. 5D4, but it sure seems like an upgrade. More MP sensor, at least as good DR, much faster frame rate, and simply unreal autofocus. It sure seems to me on this initial impression that it will be able to replace a 1DXIII and a 5D4,. but as I mentioned above, too early to tell based on really one outing and some around the house/yard playing about.

If you are really looking for my opinion on what YOU should do? I don't usually say "wait," but;

Since you are in the crowd that desires pixels on target above all else, and both your 90D and 5D4 are less than a year old, you might want to wait and see if Canon announces an APS-C version with the pixel density you enjoy in the 90D. There is no way a 17mp cropped image is going to offer the same detail and crop-ability that your 90D's 32MP offers. The only way it can compete is if you increase your focal length. We'd need to compare FOV, but maybe R5 with 800mm f/11 is about the pixels on target as you are shooting with the 90D?

Maybe an "R7" with the 90D sensor, (or denser) and the R5/R6 AF will be in the future?

at the very least I am waiting until mid next year, I agree with waiting to see what the will do with a "R7" APS-c, if they come out with one I hope it isn't crippled by Canon but is a "R5" but in APS-C

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19163683
at the very least I am waiting until mid next year, I agree with waiting to see what the will do with a "R7" APS-c, if they come out with one I hope it isn't crippled by Canon but is a "R5" but in APS-C

That's exactly what I'm waiting and hoping for.

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #19163691
That's exactly what I'm waiting and hoping for.

I still plan to rent both the R6 and R5 next year to try them out

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19163683
at the very least I am waiting until mid next year, I agree with waiting to see what the will do with a "R7" APS-c, if they come out with one I hope it isn't crippled by Canon but is a "R5" but in APS-C

Based on the half price R6, I don't think you have to worry. That $2.5K body has everything the R5 has for AF, and it too can keep pace with the $6.5K 1DXIII!

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #19163701
Based on the half price R6, I don't think you have to worry. That $2.5K body has everything the R5 has for AF, and it too can keep pace with the $6.5K 1DXIII!

I still can't believe Canon gave us that camera.

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19163726
I still can't believe Canon gave us that camera.

Yeah. With a 20 meg sensor from 2010.

If Canon had not, Sony would have. There is nothing like free market competition to move companies from old habits..... I think we several exciting years of Sony and Canon alternating into the leadership role.

Well, at least no one will accuse them of crippling their software

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #19163769
Yeah. With a 20 meg sensor from 2010.

And yet it blows away much of the competition, even those with many more megapixels, when you run an image comparison on dpreview. The R5 beats it (until you start raising the ISO too high) but not much else.

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #19163769
Yeah. With a 20 meg sensor from 2010.

Really? And yet, it is the same sensor as is in Canon's flagship, the 1DX III, a camera of 7,599 euro. That was the whole point.

goalerjones wrote in post #19163796
Well, at least no one will accuse them of crippling their software

You mean like the 24p fiasco and the artificial 30 minute limit on video? Like those?

This is an example of the eye af doing what no Canon could do before.. I realize those in this thread already accept this as commonplace, but to me it is still quite mind blowing.

From a long series of shots taken with electronic shutter of a gull fly by, every image in the series was usable from a technical point of view, with the gull in sharp focus.

IMAGE LINK: https://jakehegnauer.z​enfolio.com/p217225980​/ef3297f4d

IMAGE LINK: https://jakehegnauer.z​enfolio.com/p217225980​/ef3297f4e

Levina de Ruijter wrote in post #19163828
Really? And yet, it is the same sensor as is in Canon's flagship, the 1DX III, a camera of 7,599 euro. That was the whole point.

Please tell me about all the renowned landscape and architectural photographers that rely on the 1DX III for their livelihood. It's a sports and wildlife camera. And it's great for that. But it's not what most people are going to use for studio portrait and landscape work, and more importantly; it isn't an "every man's" every day camera, which is exactly what the R6 was supposed to be, which is also more my point.

An argument about a 20 meg sensor in 2020 is nothing more than an exercise in throwing intellectual punches at each other. At the end of the day, canon (little "c") threw it out there as a tease for what you could have had, had you chosen to give them $2000 more. It's the proverbial jump a little higher. You almost had it. A 20 meg sensor in 2020 is ridiculous. What is even more ridiculous is that marketing convinced so many how great it is.

The 1DX III is a fine camera, I'm sure. I'm not at that level, and I never will be, nor do I desire to be. It's not even made for the kind of photography I do. The R6 is a fine camera as well, but it isn't for me. I want what it should have been, which is the R sensor in the R6 body/firmware. I may never have it, but I won't be jumping up to touch a string that someone else just keeps jerking up every time I jump. I've played that game for over 40 years. That's long enough.