Who is buying an R5?

Started 1 week ago | Discussions thread
stevvi Regular Member • Posts: 406
Re: Who is buying an R5?

Zeee wrote:

Zeee wrote:

Zeee wrote:

Zeee wrote:

stevvi wrote:

Zeee wrote:

David M. Anglin wrote:

Zeee wrote:

David M. Anglin wrote:

Zeee wrote:

David M. Anglin wrote:

I have already sold some of my EF gear (5dIV , 200-400 f4, 70-200 f2.8 II) in prep for moving to the R5 or abandoning Canon for another solution, Based on rumors and expectations, I will pre-order R5, R6, RF 24-105 f4, and RF100-500 plus some accessories. I will watch the reviews and can always bail if Canon doesn’t deliver on expectations. Selling the 200-400 was more about weight than a move to RF, although it does free up a nice piece of cash. I do believe the R5 will be a great camera. As a wildlife shooter, I have to confirm the EVF and AF can handle the action. If the R5 can match or exceed my 1dx II, the rest of my EF gear will go up for sale.

I just sold my 400 DO II. Last fall I sold my 5d4 and 24-70.

The RF 24-105 f4 is a nice lens. Far better than the original EF version. I too am selling everything else and going RF but first waiting to see where this goes. If something does not pan out more than likely Sony. I have enough to get the A7 III and the 200-600.

The 200 - 600 is the one reason I would consider moving to Sony. . Not a big fan of their camera bodies, but that Lens range and capability looks awesome. I really haven’t researched it that much, but will take a serious look if something goes south with the R5. I have been hoping that Canon would release something similar with equal or better image quality. I think they are afraid of cannibalizing their big whites. The 200 - 400 is an awesome lens, but I found myself using it with the TC engaged for a high percentage of shots. The IQ is equal to the prime big whites, it is heavy.

It interesting you sold your 400 DO II, I’ve been checking the Canon site for a refurb since I think that would be a great lens wins on the R5. I have used it for airshows and found it very easy to handhold. It also works well with 1.4 TC III.

There are pattens for 200 to 600 and 200 to 700 lenses but who knows when they will will come out. This is a bit of an issue because it would be nice to have something like what Nikon and Sony have this year.

The DO was a tough decision. It was nice on the R with both the 1.4 and 2X. The IQ on my 100-400 II is not far off compared to it. I really wanted the 500 II it was out of my reach financially I got the DO so I could AF at 800mm and then the R came out. I can AF with the 100-400 II with the 2X at f 11. There is a but of an IQ hit but these days with Topaz AI sharpen you can fix it easily.

The DO did not fit into my R/RF future plans. I question the extra 3 pins the R system for faster transmission speeds. Would anyone notice using an equal EF and RF lens? Since Canon does not have the RF glass that can compete to the large EF glass right now we won't know.

The R has a High Speed Display option but is only available for RF lenses which makes me question all of this. What will the limitations for the R5/6 be? 12 and 20 fps when using an RF lens. Will the manual say 8 and 16 for EF lenses? 8 will still be better than what the R is.

Also how will AF acquisition, tracking, etc be effected. Will we be able to get the best out of the R with EF lenses as stated below from Canon. The difference might be so small no one will notice. Or will people say the A9 II with the 600 is far superior than the R5 with the 600 III? Will the adapter make it an unfair comparison?

Canon USA website. I want the full experience with an RF lens.

Astonishing Autofocus and Subject Detection

The EOS R5 brings subject detection to a new level – Utilizing Canon’s Dual Pixel CMOS AF Technology, the EOS R5 will be capable of making Ultra-High-Speed Autofocus calculations to match its immensely powerful High-Speed Shooting capability of 20 fps. Subject detection adopted from the Live View AF tracking system in the EOS-1D X Mark III brings Face, Head and even Eye tracking when People detection is set, providing ease and accuracy when capturing stills or video. Detection of Animals will also be possible for the first time in a Canon camera, effectively tracking the whole body, face, or eye of cats, dogs, or birds for speed and precision.

Those are valid observations. I think the 400 DO II holds up a bit better with TC's than the 100-400 II. I would be happy if Canon would do a refresh on the 200-400 if the stretched it to 200-500, kept the 1.4x TC @ 5.6 and dropped the wight to 6lbs (similar to 400 2.8 III & 600 III weight loss). The lens was incredible with the internal 1.4x as a 560mm @ f5.6 and I got some great shots with the 2x 800mm @ f8. I think there was a patent with a combined 1.4x, 2x TC which would even be cooler. Bottom line is that Canon need something affordable in a similar range of the Nikon & Sony with Canon IQ. As I said earlier, I sold the 200-400 due to weight rather than the transient to RF but would jump back in for lenses around the weight of the 400 DO II.

I would really like to be all RF and not have to use adaptors if Canon can deliver some long glass (and reasonably priced). This is all dependent on the EVF & AF holding up for fast action.

David

This is another reason I sold the 400 DO II

I don't want to be rude but isn't the image quality very questionable here? It looks like it's been greatly de-noised and oversharpened, or something similar. I had the 2xIII for a day and found that it made my 100-400II so soft I sold it immediately.

I may have pushed it a bit. That might have been with Topaz. Here is the original. 50 for capture sharpening and screen high for export. That lens and TC is not ideal but people like me who can't afford the 500 o5 600 have to work with what we have. I'm out for fun. I don't sell my images and for personal usage.

One more with minimal processing and no crop. I didn't bother with whites, etc.

And don't worry about critiquing my stuff. This was more of an example of how much better my R focused than my DSLR's. No pumping the BBF, etc. I still questioned how well it tracked. Even a little deviation can cause soft images. I'll see if I have any stills.

Sorry for another bump. I did purchase the 2X with the 400 DO II. I never intended to use it with the 100-400. I didn't take the DO on my last trip. I took the 100-400 and brought the 2X along. I don't use it very often.

No need to apologise! Thank you for your effort in replying so comprehensively. I am an amateur who occasionally dabbles with BIF. I find that once the R has focus it sticks quite well, although after the first shot the rest of them are often down to hoping I've got the panning right as the EVF is so laggy as to be virtually useless with anything moving at a decent rate. I'm really hoping the R5 and 100-500 will be a massive improvement as I like to take occasional sports photos too.

 stevvi's gear list:stevvi's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow