Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

Started 7 months ago | Discussions
highlights Regular Member • Posts: 184
Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

We have just completed another block course with enthusiast amateurs and the inevitable discussion on “where from here in terms of gear” occupy much of the wrap up session. Most had Canon XXX or older XX gear (or Nikon/Pentax etc) in cropped or others with 4/rds etc Couple had 6D mk1 or d750 etc

For Canon (and to a lessor extent Nikon users) the new mount and system provide a dichotomy. The new mirror-less mounts are the future no doubt, but the costs are beyond them if they are to enhance or move to a full frame kit.

Most are (this specific block course targets them) are landscapers, flora with a few into fauna, often birders,. Of course, they do other general stuff as well. For landscape the MPX is king, for fauna good frame rates, fast focusing and good reach. For most a holy trinity of say F4 15-35mm, 28-70/105mm and 70-200mm is a good start although the latter can be 100-400mm or the like.

Taking the current Canon situation for the same price as an R6 and a RF24-105 f4 they can buy a new 5DS (not R which we can not now source new) or a new 90D and new the trinity F4 of 15-200mm as above and a 1.4x converter. For the price of an R5 plus the RF24 105 they can buy new both 5DS and the 90D and the trinity and an L prime. Or swap out the 5DS, forget the prime, and get a 5DIV. Then buy an Rx when they can afford it as pricing stabilises – as they can still use their EF glass.

And of course, in the second hand market there is near new gear makes such a kit even better value.

This latter – as a suggestion -  gives them Higher MPX images albeit on an older camera, and a fast-ish modern crop that has a very good focus and track system, and whose 1.6x crop adds reach to their glass.

How do others see this scenario?

 highlights's gear list:highlights's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon 6D Mark II Nikon D5 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +20 more
Canon EOS 5DS Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Nikon D750
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
lawny13 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,079
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
3

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

prospects Regular Member • Posts: 249
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
3

lawny13 wrote:

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

While I whole heartedly agree with this, I think the OP wanted to know if the old flagship cameras are good enough today as they have reduced in price (more value for money) rather than buying the latest gadget that would be prone to greater depreciation in the next few years.

Imo, a 5DIV, 6DII, R or RP would certainly be more than good enough for most people. Most don’t actually need the R5/R6 but it’s just a nice to have.

Eddie Rizk Contributing Member • Posts: 850
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
1

highlights wrote:

We have just completed another block course with enthusiast amateurs and the inevitable discussion on “where from here in terms of gear” occupy much of the wrap up session. Most had Canon XXX or older XX gear (or Nikon/Pentax etc) in cropped or others with 4/rds etc Couple had 6D mk1 or d750 etc

The original 6D is still an outstanding camera.  I still shoot mine along with the R.

For Canon (and to a lessor extent Nikon users) the new mount and system provide a dichotomy. The new mirror-less mounts are the future no doubt, but the costs are beyond them if they are to enhance or move to a full frame kit.

They are nice cameras.  The difference is more in handling and features than IQ.

Most are (this specific block course targets them) are landscapers, flora with a few into fauna, often birders,. Of course, they do other general stuff as well. For landscape the MPX is king, for fauna good frame rates, fast focusing and good reach. For most a holy trinity of say F4 15-35mm, 28-70/105mm and 70-200mm is a good start although the latter can be 100-400mm or the like.

You need the full range, if you are a generalist.  Some people shoot one or two types of photos and therefore need only one or two lenses.  Maybe they are the smart ones.  I, on the other hand, like to be able to shoot everything.

Taking the current Canon situation for the same price as an R6 and a RF24-105 f4 they can buy a new 5DS (not R which we can not now source new) or a new 90D and new the trinity F4 of 15-200mm as above and a 1.4x converter. For the price of an R5 plus the RF24 105 they can buy new both 5DS and the 90D and the trinity and an L prime. Or swap out the 5DS, forget the prime, and get a 5DIV. Then buy an Rx when they can afford it as pricing stabilises – as they can still use their EF glass.

And of course, in the second hand market there is near new gear makes such a kit even better value.

This latter – as a suggestion - gives them Higher MPX images albeit on an older camera, and a fast-ish modern crop that has a very good focus and track system, and whose 1.6x crop adds reach to their glass.

How do others see this scenario?

I started out with the 60D and three EF-S zooms, in the range you described, and one fast prime.  I could have bought and older FF camera with a lens of some kind for the same money.

I would rather buy cheaper gear and get a complete system than better gear and have gaps in what I am able to shoot, because I am a generalist.

I could do all of my business photos and all of my hobby photos with older gear, going all the way back to the original 6D, without a drop in IQ that my clients would notice.  I might get fewer keepers per shoot, so I might have to shoot more images to get what I want.  I might have to spend more time.

Going to a cheaper new system is a conundrum, because they just don't have the same selection and quality of APS-C lenses, except maybe with Fuji, which cost as much as getting lower end or used FF lenses.

If money is tight, I'd say go for the older FF DSLR and used L lenses.

-- hide signature --

Eddie Rizk
Formerly "Ed Rizk"
My email was hacked and unrecoverable along with all associated accounts, so I got permission to create a new one.

 Eddie Rizk's gear list:Eddie Rizk's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon EOS RP Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM +3 more
R2D2 Forum Pro • Posts: 22,611
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

I don’t think the selection process has really changed, even though the technology is changing. Folks still need to assess their needs and see what fits their budget.

For those with an adequate budget, then it’s obvious where the technology and improved capabilities of mirrorless are taking us. We’re right smack in the middle of a major paradigm shift, second only to the advancement from film to digital. ML is going to change the way we shoot.

I think for the funds-limited bang-for-the-buck crowd, that the used market and close-outs (esp for DSLRs) would be the most cost effective route, at least in the short term. Folks are going to be unloading their DSLRs in droves (at least in the Canon world). EF lenses will follow, but will still remain viable for the foreseeable future (they’ll be THE choice for bargain hunters as the RF line fills out).

I think the best advice for those who do want to make the switch, but don’t have the immediate need for the new tech, should wait a little bit for the inevitable new lower tier ML bodies to come out. In Canon-land there’ll be R and RP replacements, and perhaps a Rebel-level R Series? There are definitely gaps now at the appx $1800, $1300, and $900 price points (R and RP notwithstanding). Canon’s RF lens release roadmap (existing and speculated) is certainly now aimed directly at the masses. The other manuf are advancing and growing their line-ups too of course.

The early adopters and Pros will always be paying the premium (ala R5 and R6), but I think the enthusiasts are really in for a treat too this next year   .

R2

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

 R2D2's gear list:R2D2's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS M6
BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,410
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
1

lawny13 wrote:

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

Sure that is a fair comparison but I think it’s also quite valid to compare what you are going to pay right this moment.  So, if I’m buying today, you can be sure I’m looking at the cost of all the options when I make a decision and I have to say, the attractive prices of 5d mk4’s definitely is going to have influence over what I purchase.  Even though it isn’t an exciting new model, it is a darn nice camera at a great price.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

Malachi42 Forum Member • Posts: 59
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
6

I'd focus more on the glass than the camera. Five, ten, fifteen years from now, they'll still be using the glass they buy today, assuming they buy quality glass, but they won't be using the camera they buy today.

That is certainly true in my case. I switched to Canon back in 2004, so I have a good collection of EF lenses. Today, I still use all that glass, but I rarely ever use any of the cameras I bought from back then (5D and 20D).

So, I'm going to go off the beaten path and suggest the RP. It's a perfectly capable still photographer's camera that can make use of quality, used EF glass, while opening the door to the RF line up.

Of course, if there are certain features that are absolute requirements, like 50 MP or 12 FPS, then obviously it's not the right camera. But, for anyone who can make do with it's perfectly good capabilities, it's a great gateway camera. The $1500 (R6) to $2400 (R5) you save, for an R-series camera you can actually put your hands on today, can go towards some good quality glass.

Anyway, just another perspective.

 Malachi42's gear list:Malachi42's gear list
Canon EOS M5 Canon EOS RP Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS 20D Canon EOS M3 +14 more
RH McCaslan Regular Member • Posts: 125
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

This is really a fascinating topic.  Thanks for raising it.

R2D2 wrote:

I don’t think the selection process has really changed, even though the technology is changing. Folks still need to assess their needs and see what fits their budget.

Agreed.

For those with an adequate budget, then it’s obvious where the technology and improved capabilities of mirrorless are taking us. We’re right smack in the middle of a major paradigm shift, second only to the advancement from film to digital. ML is going to change the way we shoot.

Really? I think that the shift is incredibly important for Camera manufacturers--it greatly reduces their costs by removing a lot of moving parts--, but for most photographers, what I'm seeing is evolutionary changes rather than revolutionary changes. Lot of the improvements in AF and burst rates are available in DSLR (eg., 1DX M3), albeit at a much higher price point

Lens improvements also appear to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary.  Most of Canon's L releases are actually larger than EF counterparts with the notable exception of the  R 70-200L lens.  But, correct me if I'm wrong, I suspect that this lens could  have been produced as an EF lens.  One of the most startling characteristics of the new offerings is that despite overall better IQ, almost all the lenses have horrendous vignetting performance.

Thus, I don't really see that much of a paradigm shift.  Instead, I think that we will just see new features and innovations appear in mirrorless first and in DSLR later if at all.

I think for the funds-limited bang-for-the-buck crowd, that the used market and close-outs (esp for DSLRs) would be the most cost effective route, at least in the short term. Folks are going to be unloading their DSLRs in droves (at least in the Canon world). EF lenses will follow, but will still remain viable for the foreseeable future (they’ll be THE choice for bargain hunters as the RF line fills out).

Agree fully. This is a great time to switch to full frame or simply upgrade due to so many people moving to mirrorless.   I recently sold my lightly used 100-400L II for probably a rediculously low amount in order to facilitate acquisition of the R 100-500L.  For me, the 100-400 was lightly used due to its limited reach.  The additional 25% on the long enough was enough of an incentive to prompt the switch.   Someone benefited fabulously due to my indulgence.

I think the best advice for those who do want to make the switch, but don’t have the immediate need for the new tech, should wait a little bit for the inevitable new lower tier ML bodies to come out. In Canon-land there’ll be R and RP replacements, and perhaps a Rebel-level R Series? There are definitely gaps now at the appx $1800, $1300, and $900 price points (R and RP notwithstanding). Canon’s RF lens release roadmap (existing and speculated) is certainly now aimed directly at the masses. The other manuf are advancing and growing their line-ups too of course.

The early adopters and Pros will always be paying the premium (ala R5 and R6), but I think the enthusiasts are really in for a treat too this next year .

R2

Malachi42 wrote:

I'd focus more on the glass than the camera. Five, ten, fifteen years from now, they'll still be using the glass they buy today, assuming they buy quality glass, but they won't be using the camera they buy today.

That is certainly true in my case. I switched to Canon back in 2004, so I have a good collection of EF lenses. Today, I still use all that glass, but I rarely ever use any of the cameras I bought from back then (5D and 20D).

So, I'm going to go off the beaten path and suggest the RP. It's a perfectly capable still photographer's camera that can make use of quality, used EF glass, while opening the door to the RF line up.

Of course, if there are certain features that are absolute requirements, like 50 MP or 12 FPS, then obviously it's not the right camera. But, for anyone who can make due with it's perfectly good capabilities, it's a great gateway camera. The $1500 (R6) to $2400 (R5) you save, for an R-series camera you can actually put your hands on today, can go towards some good quality glass.

I think that this is excellent advice.

New innovations will appear in the R series first and in EF later if at all ( probably primarily or entirely in the 1DX series).  Thus, to get access to great and innovative lenses like the R 15-35L, R 70-200L, and R 100-500L, you need an R body.  If I were a birder or wildlife shooter, I'd really want the 100-500L rather than the 100-400, and that extra mm at the wide end of the 15-35 might keep you from needing to purchase an ultra-wide 14-24 lens.   I've always prefer an wide-angle zoom as my walkaround rather than a 24-70.   However, 16-35 wasn't wide enough, and 14-24 (or Tamron's 15-30) just weren't long enough.  I'm hoping the 15-35  is in the Godilocks zone.

So, in sum, I like Malachi's advice to focus on lenses.  If you are looking to upgrade--especially from APS-C to full frame--the innovation is in the R series.  However, if you are on a budget, and any purchase is a reach or a strain, then DSLR is the way to go.  Most of the world cannot afford $2000+ zooms and primes.

lawny13 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,079
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

Sure that is a fair comparison but I think it’s also quite valid to compare what you are going to pay right this moment. So, if I’m buying today, you can be sure I’m looking at the cost of all the options when I make a decision and I have to say, the attractive prices of 5d mk4’s definitely is going to have influence over what I purchase. Even though it isn’t an exciting new model, it is a darn nice camera at a great price.

I was think I pointed out that they could get the latest DSLR and wait for the MILC prices to come down.

In general IQ of the cameras he mentioned all hold up and even today. The major improvements that you get from MILC will be things like AF and DR. For those doing landscape I don’t see why an R would t just be great value at €1800. After all the 5D4 is still selling well above 2k.

The main concern would be to those looking for things low birding. Though one can most definitely can do it with the 5D4, there is no disputing that the R6 and R5 will do considerably better. And last I checked most serious birders have some darn expensive lenses. So I figured a mini 1DXIII (R6) would be within reach.

Cause let’s not forget... the 5D4 sells for €2600 here while the R6 goes for €2400.

Anyway. In the end people see to evaluate money vs value for themselves.

BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,410
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

Sure that is a fair comparison but I think it’s also quite valid to compare what you are going to pay right this moment. So, if I’m buying today, you can be sure I’m looking at the cost of all the options when I make a decision and I have to say, the attractive prices of 5d mk4’s definitely is going to have influence over what I purchase. Even though it isn’t an exciting new model, it is a darn nice camera at a great price.

I was think I pointed out that they could get the latest DSLR and wait for the MILC prices to come down.

In general IQ of the cameras he mentioned all hold up and even today. The major improvements that you get from MILC will be things like AF and DR. For those doing landscape I don’t see why an R would t just be great value at €1800. After all the 5D4 is still selling well above 2k.

The main concern would be to those looking for things low birding. Though one can most definitely can do it with the 5D4, there is no disputing that the R6 and R5 will do considerably better. And last I checked most serious birders have some darn expensive lenses. So I figured a mini 1DXIII (R6) would be within reach.

Cause let’s not forget... the 5D4 sells for €2600 here while the R6 goes for €2400.

Anyway. In the end people see to evaluate money vs value for themselves.

The 5d mk4 is definitely good for birding and yes I agree if you are mainly doing landscapes the R is definitely a good value. Around here lightly used 5d mk4’s are selling for VERY attractive prices. I’m confident that the R5 and R6 will have some advantages over the 5d mk4 for birding but also I’m sure there are also disadvantages. For example, battery life and optical viewfinder. Also I saw a review from a very experienced birder that said the 5d mk4 did better with TC’s on the big primes... Anyway I’m glad the new r’s are so popular, it means there are some extremely good deals on older gear now.

Since it looks like I won’t be receiving my R5 any time soon I have decided to rent an R6 (R5 wasn’t even available for rent until something like October 10) to really experiment with the AF system and try to figure out if I really want to keep my R5 order active or to cancel it. It’s frustrating to get so much second hand information and lots of it is conflicting. The more I investigate the more these new cameras seem to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. If that’s the case I might be grabbing a used 7d mk2 and 5d mk4 to tide me over until something comes out that looks like a better fit for me than the very expensive R5. Certainly if the AF system turns out to be as good as I hope it is then the cost of the R5 will be well worth it but I really need to see for myself before I make a decision to cancel or not.

After seeing how expensive the RF 100-500 is I’m afraid to see how much the RF 500mm f/4 will be.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

lawny13 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,079
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
1

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

Sure that is a fair comparison but I think it’s also quite valid to compare what you are going to pay right this moment. So, if I’m buying today, you can be sure I’m looking at the cost of all the options when I make a decision and I have to say, the attractive prices of 5d mk4’s definitely is going to have influence over what I purchase. Even though it isn’t an exciting new model, it is a darn nice camera at a great price.

I was think I pointed out that they could get the latest DSLR and wait for the MILC prices to come down.

In general IQ of the cameras he mentioned all hold up and even today. The major improvements that you get from MILC will be things like AF and DR. For those doing landscape I don’t see why an R would t just be great value at €1800. After all the 5D4 is still selling well above 2k.

The main concern would be to those looking for things low birding. Though one can most definitely can do it with the 5D4, there is no disputing that the R6 and R5 will do considerably better. And last I checked most serious birders have some darn expensive lenses. So I figured a mini 1DXIII (R6) would be within reach.

Cause let’s not forget... the 5D4 sells for €2600 here while the R6 goes for €2400.

Anyway. In the end people see to evaluate money vs value for themselves.

The 5d mk4 is definitely good for birding and yes I agree if you are mainly doing landscapes the R is definitely a good value. Around here lightly used 5d mk4’s are selling for VERY attractive prices. I’m confident that the R5 and R6 will have some advantages over the 5d mk4 for birding but also I’m sure there are also disadvantages. For example, battery life and optical viewfinder. Also I saw a review from a very experienced birder that said the 5d mk4 did better with TC’s on the big primes... Anyway I’m glad the new r’s are so popular, it means there are some extremely good deals on older gear now.

Since it looks like I won’t be receiving my R5 any time soon I have decided to rent an R6 (R5 wasn’t even available for rent until something like October 10) to really experiment with the AF system and try to figure out if I really want to keep my R5 order active or to cancel it. It’s frustrating to get so much second hand information and lots of it is conflicting. The more I investigate the more these new cameras seem to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. If that’s the case I might be grabbing a used 7d mk2 and 5d mk4 to tide me over until something comes out that looks like a better fit for me than the very expensive R5. Certainly if the AF system turns out to be as good as I hope it is then the cost of the R5 will be well worth it but I really need to see for myself before I make a decision to cancel or not.

After seeing how expensive the RF 100-500 is I’m afraid to see how much the RF 500mm f/4 will be.

20 fps is 20 fps. For birding that is definitely a big one.

And  no, they are not evolutionary. They are indeed revolutionary. That is only really one issue either the R5 and the the battery life. Besides that I see absolutely no point in needing an “upgrade” in the next 2-5 years.

Well there is one thing about it that annoys me to be honest. With e-shutter you either get 20 fps or one. You can’t see it to be in between. But that is itZ

And I have owned the A7III for about a year and a half, shot the 7D and 5D lines etc. Edge to edge AF with subject tracking and recognition to this level. Canon went from the likes of the R to arguably surpassing Sony... big time and definitely when it comes to animals.

Basically the R5 will allow me to forget about getting the next body to upgrade to, and focus and spend my money in glass.

You will see...

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

Bernie_King Senior Member • Posts: 2,103
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
2

At this point, I think the real value would be in a used DSLR. I don't know why anyone in their right mind would buy a brand new 5DS when used examples are flirting with $1000.

OP highlights Regular Member • Posts: 184
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
1

While it will vary by market, locally we can get gray market 5DS with a 12 mth Guarantee for between 5% and 10% more than a used one without any guarantee  . In some cases this 5DS price is less than a 4 yo 5DSr with 100k+ activations.

Whiles the DSr is sharper than the DS due to the reversal of the aliasing filter for most enthusiasts it doesn't matter.

Given for a large number of enthusiasts, their landscape work will (or should be at 50mpx) be largely off a tripod in good light, is is hard to sell the benefits of the R5 and its AF and blinding burst rates, at four and a quarter times the price.

 highlights's gear list:highlights's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon 6D Mark II Nikon D5 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +20 more
Bernie_King Senior Member • Posts: 2,103
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

highlights wrote:

While it will vary by market, locally we can get gray market 5DS with a 12 mth Guarantee for between 5% and 10% more than a used one without any guarantee . In some cases this 5DS price is less than a 4 yo 5DSr with 100k+ activations.

Whiles the DSr is sharper than the DS due to the reversal of the aliasing filter for most enthusiasts it doesn't matter.

Given for a large number of enthusiasts, their landscape work will (or should be at 50mpx) be largely off a tripod in good light, is is hard to sell the benefits of the R5 and its AF and blinding burst rates, at four and a quarter times the price.

If that's the case, not a bad deal.  I was just checking B&H and the 5DS was $3499 and I know I can get a used one with very low shots (they all seem to have very low actuations) for around $1000.  I suppose $1100 USD would be a good deal for a new one with guarantee.

BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,410
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
1

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

Sure that is a fair comparison but I think it’s also quite valid to compare what you are going to pay right this moment. So, if I’m buying today, you can be sure I’m looking at the cost of all the options when I make a decision and I have to say, the attractive prices of 5d mk4’s definitely is going to have influence over what I purchase. Even though it isn’t an exciting new model, it is a darn nice camera at a great price.

I was think I pointed out that they could get the latest DSLR and wait for the MILC prices to come down.

In general IQ of the cameras he mentioned all hold up and even today. The major improvements that you get from MILC will be things like AF and DR. For those doing landscape I don’t see why an R would t just be great value at €1800. After all the 5D4 is still selling well above 2k.

The main concern would be to those looking for things low birding. Though one can most definitely can do it with the 5D4, there is no disputing that the R6 and R5 will do considerably better. And last I checked most serious birders have some darn expensive lenses. So I figured a mini 1DXIII (R6) would be within reach.

Cause let’s not forget... the 5D4 sells for €2600 here while the R6 goes for €2400.

Anyway. In the end people see to evaluate money vs value for themselves.

The 5d mk4 is definitely good for birding and yes I agree if you are mainly doing landscapes the R is definitely a good value. Around here lightly used 5d mk4’s are selling for VERY attractive prices. I’m confident that the R5 and R6 will have some advantages over the 5d mk4 for birding but also I’m sure there are also disadvantages. For example, battery life and optical viewfinder. Also I saw a review from a very experienced birder that said the 5d mk4 did better with TC’s on the big primes... Anyway I’m glad the new r’s are so popular, it means there are some extremely good deals on older gear now.

Since it looks like I won’t be receiving my R5 any time soon I have decided to rent an R6 (R5 wasn’t even available for rent until something like October 10) to really experiment with the AF system and try to figure out if I really want to keep my R5 order active or to cancel it. It’s frustrating to get so much second hand information and lots of it is conflicting. The more I investigate the more these new cameras seem to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. If that’s the case I might be grabbing a used 7d mk2 and 5d mk4 to tide me over until something comes out that looks like a better fit for me than the very expensive R5. Certainly if the AF system turns out to be as good as I hope it is then the cost of the R5 will be well worth it but I really need to see for myself before I make a decision to cancel or not.

After seeing how expensive the RF 100-500 is I’m afraid to see how much the RF 500mm f/4 will be.

20 fps is 20 fps. For birding that is definitely a big one.

And no, they are not evolutionary. They are indeed revolutionary. That is only really one issue either the R5 and the the battery life. Besides that I see absolutely no point in needing an “upgrade” in the next 2-5 years.

Well there is one thing about it that annoys me to be honest. With e-shutter you either get 20 fps or one. You can’t see it to be in between. But that is itZ

And I have owned the A7III for about a year and a half, shot the 7D and 5D lines etc. Edge to edge AF with subject tracking and recognition to this level. Canon went from the likes of the R to arguably surpassing Sony... big time and definitely when it comes to animals.

Basically the R5 will allow me to forget about getting the next body to upgrade to, and focus and spend my money in glass.

You will see...

20fps isn’t the be all end all, especially if they all aren’t in focus.  I’m reading a good number of reports that the AF might not be as perfect as the specs suggest.  Certainly everyone seems to agree that it’s good but then what we had before was quite good.  Also, to realize full performance of these new cameras you have to have the latest lenses and they are definitely pricey.  So I’m looking at bodies that are twice as expensive, the need to upgrade my expensive lenses, expensive mem cards, battery grips that I didn’t need in the past...  I’m really starting to wonder in the performance difference is really worth the price.  Hopefully this coming week I’ll have a better idea.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,410
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

Bernie_King wrote:

At this point, I think the real value would be in a used DSLR. I don't know why anyone in their right mind would buy a brand new 5DS when used examples are flirting with $1000.

Exactly, there is a lot of really great SLR gear available on the used market for VERY attractive prices.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

R2D2 Forum Pro • Posts: 22,611
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR
1

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

Sure that is a fair comparison but I think it’s also quite valid to compare what you are going to pay right this moment. So, if I’m buying today, you can be sure I’m looking at the cost of all the options when I make a decision and I have to say, the attractive prices of 5d mk4’s definitely is going to have influence over what I purchase. Even though it isn’t an exciting new model, it is a darn nice camera at a great price.

I was think I pointed out that they could get the latest DSLR and wait for the MILC prices to come down.

In general IQ of the cameras he mentioned all hold up and even today. The major improvements that you get from MILC will be things like AF and DR. For those doing landscape I don’t see why an R would t just be great value at €1800. After all the 5D4 is still selling well above 2k.

The main concern would be to those looking for things low birding. Though one can most definitely can do it with the 5D4, there is no disputing that the R6 and R5 will do considerably better. And last I checked most serious birders have some darn expensive lenses. So I figured a mini 1DXIII (R6) would be within reach.

Cause let’s not forget... the 5D4 sells for €2600 here while the R6 goes for €2400.

Anyway. In the end people see to evaluate money vs value for themselves.

The 5d mk4 is definitely good for birding and yes I agree if you are mainly doing landscapes the R is definitely a good value. Around here lightly used 5d mk4’s are selling for VERY attractive prices. I’m confident that the R5 and R6 will have some advantages over the 5d mk4 for birding but also I’m sure there are also disadvantages. For example, battery life and optical viewfinder. Also I saw a review from a very experienced birder that said the 5d mk4 did better with TC’s on the big primes... Anyway I’m glad the new r’s are so popular, it means there are some extremely good deals on older gear now.

Since it looks like I won’t be receiving my R5 any time soon I have decided to rent an R6 (R5 wasn’t even available for rent until something like October 10) to really experiment with the AF system and try to figure out if I really want to keep my R5 order active or to cancel it. It’s frustrating to get so much second hand information and lots of it is conflicting. The more I investigate the more these new cameras seem to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. If that’s the case I might be grabbing a used 7d mk2 and 5d mk4 to tide me over until something comes out that looks like a better fit for me than the very expensive R5. Certainly if the AF system turns out to be as good as I hope it is then the cost of the R5 will be well worth it but I really need to see for myself before I make a decision to cancel or not.

After seeing how expensive the RF 100-500 is I’m afraid to see how much the RF 500mm f/4 will be.

20 fps is 20 fps. For birding that is definitely a big one.

And no, they are not evolutionary. They are indeed revolutionary. That is only really one issue either the R5 and the the battery life. Besides that I see absolutely no point in needing an “upgrade” in the next 2-5 years.

Well there is one thing about it that annoys me to be honest. With e-shutter you either get 20 fps or one. You can’t see it to be in between. But that is itZ

And I have owned the A7III for about a year and a half, shot the 7D and 5D lines etc. Edge to edge AF with subject tracking and recognition to this level. Canon went from the likes of the R to arguably surpassing Sony... big time and definitely when it comes to animals.

Basically the R5 will allow me to forget about getting the next body to upgrade to, and focus and spend my money in glass.

You will see...

20fps isn’t the be all end all, especially if they all aren’t in focus. I’m reading a good number of reports that the AF might not be as perfect as the specs suggest. Certainly everyone seems to agree that it’s good but then what we had before was quite good. Also, to realize full performance of these new cameras you have to have the latest lenses and they are definitely pricey. So I’m looking at bodies that are twice as expensive, the need to upgrade my expensive lenses, expensive mem cards, battery grips that I didn’t need in the past... I’m really starting to wonder in the performance difference is really worth the price. Hopefully this coming week I’ll have a better idea.

LOL, we’ll all have our doubts while waiting for our cameras to arrive.  It’s just a natural part of the process.

Then when the cameras do arrive, we’ll have the inevitable moments of regret.  At least until we get to know the cameras better.

This has always been the risk for early-adopters.  The key to minimizing both of these is to know beforehand (as much as possible) what you’re getting into.

This time around however, I think the protracted wait (for most of us) has indeed made it harder to maintain our sanity   .  But it’ll also make the transition easier as well, once we get our little mitts on the darn things!  

What I do know for sure, is that once the big shipment does come in, that we’ll all be able to watch it play out in full color, right here on the forums.  

Enjoy the wait,

R2

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

 R2D2's gear list:R2D2's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS M6
BirdShooter7 Veteran Member • Posts: 6,410
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

R2D2 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

Sure that is a fair comparison but I think it’s also quite valid to compare what you are going to pay right this moment. So, if I’m buying today, you can be sure I’m looking at the cost of all the options when I make a decision and I have to say, the attractive prices of 5d mk4’s definitely is going to have influence over what I purchase. Even though it isn’t an exciting new model, it is a darn nice camera at a great price.

I was think I pointed out that they could get the latest DSLR and wait for the MILC prices to come down.

In general IQ of the cameras he mentioned all hold up and even today. The major improvements that you get from MILC will be things like AF and DR. For those doing landscape I don’t see why an R would t just be great value at €1800. After all the 5D4 is still selling well above 2k.

The main concern would be to those looking for things low birding. Though one can most definitely can do it with the 5D4, there is no disputing that the R6 and R5 will do considerably better. And last I checked most serious birders have some darn expensive lenses. So I figured a mini 1DXIII (R6) would be within reach.

Cause let’s not forget... the 5D4 sells for €2600 here while the R6 goes for €2400.

Anyway. In the end people see to evaluate money vs value for themselves.

The 5d mk4 is definitely good for birding and yes I agree if you are mainly doing landscapes the R is definitely a good value. Around here lightly used 5d mk4’s are selling for VERY attractive prices. I’m confident that the R5 and R6 will have some advantages over the 5d mk4 for birding but also I’m sure there are also disadvantages. For example, battery life and optical viewfinder. Also I saw a review from a very experienced birder that said the 5d mk4 did better with TC’s on the big primes... Anyway I’m glad the new r’s are so popular, it means there are some extremely good deals on older gear now.

Since it looks like I won’t be receiving my R5 any time soon I have decided to rent an R6 (R5 wasn’t even available for rent until something like October 10) to really experiment with the AF system and try to figure out if I really want to keep my R5 order active or to cancel it. It’s frustrating to get so much second hand information and lots of it is conflicting. The more I investigate the more these new cameras seem to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. If that’s the case I might be grabbing a used 7d mk2 and 5d mk4 to tide me over until something comes out that looks like a better fit for me than the very expensive R5. Certainly if the AF system turns out to be as good as I hope it is then the cost of the R5 will be well worth it but I really need to see for myself before I make a decision to cancel or not.

After seeing how expensive the RF 100-500 is I’m afraid to see how much the RF 500mm f/4 will be.

20 fps is 20 fps. For birding that is definitely a big one.

And no, they are not evolutionary. They are indeed revolutionary. That is only really one issue either the R5 and the the battery life. Besides that I see absolutely no point in needing an “upgrade” in the next 2-5 years.

Well there is one thing about it that annoys me to be honest. With e-shutter you either get 20 fps or one. You can’t see it to be in between. But that is itZ

And I have owned the A7III for about a year and a half, shot the 7D and 5D lines etc. Edge to edge AF with subject tracking and recognition to this level. Canon went from the likes of the R to arguably surpassing Sony... big time and definitely when it comes to animals.

Basically the R5 will allow me to forget about getting the next body to upgrade to, and focus and spend my money in glass.

You will see...

20fps isn’t the be all end all, especially if they all aren’t in focus. I’m reading a good number of reports that the AF might not be as perfect as the specs suggest. Certainly everyone seems to agree that it’s good but then what we had before was quite good. Also, to realize full performance of these new cameras you have to have the latest lenses and they are definitely pricey. So I’m looking at bodies that are twice as expensive, the need to upgrade my expensive lenses, expensive mem cards, battery grips that I didn’t need in the past... I’m really starting to wonder in the performance difference is really worth the price. Hopefully this coming week I’ll have a better idea.

LOL, we’ll all have our doubts while waiting for our cameras to arrive. It’s just a natural part of the process.

Then when the cameras do arrive, we’ll have the inevitable moments of regret. At least until we get to know the cameras better.

This has always been the risk for early-adopters. The key to minimizing both of these is to know beforehand (as much as possible) what you’re getting into.

This time around however, I think the protracted wait (for most of us) has indeed made it harder to maintain our sanity . But it’ll also make the transition easier as well, once we get our little mitts on the darn things!

What I do know for sure, is that once the big shipment does come in, that we’ll all be able to watch it play out in full color, right here on the forums.

Enjoy the wait,

R2

Well my rental is scheduled to arrive Tuesday so I should know pretty soon if it’s worth it for me or not pretty soon.

-- hide signature --

Some of my bird photos can be viewed here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gregsbirds/

OP highlights Regular Member • Posts: 184
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

lawny13 wrote:

I was think I pointed out that they could get the latest DSLR and wait for the MILC prices to come down.

In general IQ of the cameras he mentioned all hold up and even today. The major improvements that you get from MILC will be things like AF and DR. For those doing landscape I don’t see why an R would t just be great value at €1800. After all the 5D4 is still selling well above 2k.

The main concern would be to those looking for things low birding. Though one can most definitely can do it with the 5D4, there is no disputing that the R6 and R5 will do considerably better. And last I checked most serious birders have some darn expensive lenses. So I figured a mini 1DXIII (R6) would be within reach.

Cause let’s not forget... the 5D4 sells for €2600 here while the R6 goes for €2400.

I don't understand why the relative pricing between models is so different in different markets. Here in NZ the 5D4 is going for around NZD $3400, the R for about the same but the R6 for $4750. R5 is abiout $7,700. RP and 6D2 both about $1,950-$2000.

The launch price for the 5D4 was three odd years back about $4500.

Anyway. In the end people see to evaluate money vs value for themselves.

 highlights's gear list:highlights's gear list
Canon EOS 5DS R Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon 6D Mark II Nikon D5 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV +20 more
lawny13 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,079
Re: Relative value new R MICL vs old DSLR

BirdShooter7 wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

BirdShooter7 wrote:

lawny13 wrote:

People really need to look at the relative value of MSRP.

I am not sure why so many keep comparing the release prices to what you can get older models for now. For example here in Europe the 5DIV launched for €4500. The R5 launched for relatively the same price.

The 6D was in the 2k was range and now so is the R6. For both the R5 and R6 you get a major jump in features. They both do 20 fps which was only 1D territory.

The same goes for the launch prices of a 5DS/R.

So... had canon launched a new one of any of the DSLR lines what prices points would you expect th to be at?? Pretty much the same as the usual MSRP right?

So if people realise this then they must also realise that prices will come down over time in a similar fashion. They can upgrade to the latest DSLR version and hold out for later down the road when the RF cameras come down in price. Or they can pick up one that already came down in price (R from 2300 to 1800 for example), or they can get on to the R5/R6. And remember they can seemlessly adapt the lenses they already have.

Sure that is a fair comparison but I think it’s also quite valid to compare what you are going to pay right this moment. So, if I’m buying today, you can be sure I’m looking at the cost of all the options when I make a decision and I have to say, the attractive prices of 5d mk4’s definitely is going to have influence over what I purchase. Even though it isn’t an exciting new model, it is a darn nice camera at a great price.

I was think I pointed out that they could get the latest DSLR and wait for the MILC prices to come down.

In general IQ of the cameras he mentioned all hold up and even today. The major improvements that you get from MILC will be things like AF and DR. For those doing landscape I don’t see why an R would t just be great value at €1800. After all the 5D4 is still selling well above 2k.

The main concern would be to those looking for things low birding. Though one can most definitely can do it with the 5D4, there is no disputing that the R6 and R5 will do considerably better. And last I checked most serious birders have some darn expensive lenses. So I figured a mini 1DXIII (R6) would be within reach.

Cause let’s not forget... the 5D4 sells for €2600 here while the R6 goes for €2400.

Anyway. In the end people see to evaluate money vs value for themselves.

The 5d mk4 is definitely good for birding and yes I agree if you are mainly doing landscapes the R is definitely a good value. Around here lightly used 5d mk4’s are selling for VERY attractive prices. I’m confident that the R5 and R6 will have some advantages over the 5d mk4 for birding but also I’m sure there are also disadvantages. For example, battery life and optical viewfinder. Also I saw a review from a very experienced birder that said the 5d mk4 did better with TC’s on the big primes... Anyway I’m glad the new r’s are so popular, it means there are some extremely good deals on older gear now.

Since it looks like I won’t be receiving my R5 any time soon I have decided to rent an R6 (R5 wasn’t even available for rent until something like October 10) to really experiment with the AF system and try to figure out if I really want to keep my R5 order active or to cancel it. It’s frustrating to get so much second hand information and lots of it is conflicting. The more I investigate the more these new cameras seem to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. If that’s the case I might be grabbing a used 7d mk2 and 5d mk4 to tide me over until something comes out that looks like a better fit for me than the very expensive R5. Certainly if the AF system turns out to be as good as I hope it is then the cost of the R5 will be well worth it but I really need to see for myself before I make a decision to cancel or not.

After seeing how expensive the RF 100-500 is I’m afraid to see how much the RF 500mm f/4 will be.

20 fps is 20 fps. For birding that is definitely a big one.

And no, they are not evolutionary. They are indeed revolutionary. That is only really one issue either the R5 and the the battery life. Besides that I see absolutely no point in needing an “upgrade” in the next 2-5 years.

Well there is one thing about it that annoys me to be honest. With e-shutter you either get 20 fps or one. You can’t see it to be in between. But that is itZ

And I have owned the A7III for about a year and a half, shot the 7D and 5D lines etc. Edge to edge AF with subject tracking and recognition to this level. Canon went from the likes of the R to arguably surpassing Sony... big time and definitely when it comes to animals.

Basically the R5 will allow me to forget about getting the next body to upgrade to, and focus and spend my money in glass.

You will see...

20fps isn’t the be all end all, especially if they all aren’t in focus. I’m reading a good number of reports that the AF might not be as perfect as the specs suggest. Certainly everyone seems to agree that it’s good but then what we had before was quite good. Also, to realize full performance of these new cameras you have to have the latest lenses and they are definitely pricey. So I’m looking at bodies that are twice as expensive, the need to upgrade my expensive lenses, expensive mem cards, battery grips that I didn’t need in the past... I’m really starting to wonder in the performance difference is really worth the price. Hopefully this coming week I’ll have a better idea.

LOL, we’ll all have our doubts while waiting for our cameras to arrive. It’s just a natural part of the process.

Then when the cameras do arrive, we’ll have the inevitable moments of regret. At least until we get to know the cameras better.

This has always been the risk for early-adopters. The key to minimizing both of these is to know beforehand (as much as possible) what you’re getting into.

This time around however, I think the protracted wait (for most of us) has indeed made it harder to maintain our sanity . But it’ll also make the transition easier as well, once we get our little mitts on the darn things!

Do get back to us on what you conclude using it.

So far... the AF is all that. The 20 fps is actually quite good. I only which I could do 8 fps in e-shutter, or 5 as options rather than single or full out 20.

The only real thing I see as meh with the R5 is battery life. And of course I wouldn't mind having it for half the price, but that is simply unrealistic. 
As for comments like getting camera for half the price. Which one were you talking about? Cause if you look at a 5DS new, it would cost you about €3500 at B&H vs the R5 for $3899 at B&H. 
Yes I am comparing it to the 5DS because it resolves at that level. Yet you get 8 fps live feed, or 12 fps, or 20 fps e-shutter, corner to corner AF coverage, - 6EV focusing, and f11 or even narrower focusing as well. The list goes on. 
In comparison, if you had a new 5DIV, it would be in the same price point and the upgrade would be more incremental. It definitely won't have most of that list above... dual cards sure, maybe the same IQ. But not the rest, and no eye af in VF.

Anyway... everyone needs to decide what is worth the money and the change to them. I didn't have much canon gear before, so to me it was an obvious choice. And I am not regretting it.

What I do know for sure, is that once the big shipment does come in, that we’ll all be able to watch it play out in full color, right here on the forums.

Enjoy the wait,

R2

Well my rental is scheduled to arrive Tuesday so I should know pretty soon if it’s worth it for me or not pretty soon.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads