from nikon to canon r5

i could have written an "r5 review" and say: "the r5 is a great camera blah blah blah... highly recommend it blah blah blah...." and so on, but... why?

i think my story is a little most beneficial and controversial, i've been shooting nikon dslr for 13 years, back in 2008 i was torn as a youngster between the nikon d60 and the canon 1000d, i had saved up the money and wanted to make the most out of it, i drove the store owner absolutely mad for nearly a month, and finally decided... the d60!

since then i had never looked back, i loved the nikon system from every possible aspect, and had been the proud owner of a couple of apsc models, the final being the d500 i bought in 2017, which was (and still is) the peak of apsc dslr tech, and i absolutely loved it.

just prior to the covid pandemic i started turning my long loved hobby into a business, which, thank g-d, despite the pandemic worked out great, eventually i knew i should switch to a full frame platform and generally invest more in hardware, all this came to more practical lines towards the end of last year, and so i did my homework on the different options available (most of my kit was apsc centric and had to go anyhow ).

the obvious choice for my hobby was the d850, it is one of the best cameras of all times, and what my d500 was aspiring to be when it'll grow up, but being now business minded forced me to go mirrorless, there is so much practical advantages in the new system that it was the obvious way to go even if it's not as fun, and so... nikon z!

when i picked up a z7 ii body it felt like a small dslr body with the soul of a point and shoot, i don't mean photo quality wise, on that front there's few that can compete with it, but the whole interface, the evf the af system etc. all felt unprofessional and unintuitive compared to what i was used to, i just wished nikon would suddenly come up with a d850 with an evf and add face/eye detect to their existing 3d tracking system, but that didn't happen....

i actually waited a few months to see whether some rumor would come up but... no.

i then had a look at the canon r5, the sony a7r iv and a1 and the fuji gfx 100s, i was also offered the z9 on a rather short wait, but i thought it was too big and heavy for what i do, plus i'm not too fond of the whole shutterless idea... (i couldn't handle one to see for myself)

the fuji was out of the game for me because of af (i do have a dream to own one for shooting in the studio with...), the sony cameras were an appealing option on paper but once i tried them out they just didn't feel right, particularly the a7r, and so i was left with canon...

i cannot explain to you (honored canon junkies) how sceptic i was... after years of dissing canon owners about the toy-like appearance of their system and the old school tech under it's hood, i was going to be one of "them"?...

when i picked up the r5, at first i said "no! this is not a worthy successor to my beefy d500!" but the moment i stepped out of the store and tested it (with old ef glass...) i was surprised, it felt like shooting a... camera! a proper camera! something i had almost given up on in the mirrorless world, suddenly the evf felt like an advantage rather then an unwelcome change, in the blink of an eye i was able to adjust the dials and buttons to work the way they should (the nikon way perhaps...), and the rest is history.

after a few months of daily use i can say: the r5 IS a worthy successor to my d500! with the rf L glass i primarily shoot with, it physically feels dslr-lite (=good), maybe not d850-good but that's not an issue, the main thing is that the tech it incorporates has brought my work to new heights, and with that it doesn't interfere with my natural workflow, yes, a d850 or any other dslr for that matter may be more fun, but for my work this is as much fun as i'd ever want to have, and the results are of far higher quality, focus is bang on every time, there's no more chimping between shots, 12 fps means 12 sharp useable pics in every situation, image quality overall (which in my opinion has been a notorious achilles heel in the canon system over the years) is excellent (although there may be better), rf glass is amazing (both the lenses per se and the options available in the lineup as a whole) and the system is ergonomically planned out unlike any other (even nikon).

my issues with the r5 are: 1. the direction of the zoom ring (although i'm starting to get the hang of it...) 2. the "rate" button is where i naturally go for playback (the nikon z cameras have the same issue and the new spot makes much more sense on mirrorless) 3. canon awb sucks! and while the first two are minor, this one drives me mad! awb (even in white priority mode) is often off by miles, and often is inconsistent in the sense that two shots in the same place with the same lighting can come out different, i never had any issue like this with nikon awb, and although i work with raws, it's a shame (i know there's worse systems out there but that's not an excuse).

while there's always a space in my heart for nikon cameras, i'm extremely happy with my move, and will gladly recommend the r5 over any of the above mentioned cameras (yes! that's right! even over a1 z9 and... d850) to most people.

hope this was of any help to someone.

And you are happy with the battery  life?!

I was a longtime nikon shooter, everything including d500, d850, d4, d3s....and a z6/z7/z7ii....I had a friend who likes to swap very expensive wildlife gear who sold me his r5 and 600f4, and since nikon at that time didn't have anything to compete, I switched. Right now I don't own any nikon bodies although I've kept a few of their lenses around.

The r5 is imo the best all around camera in its price class, just as the d850 was in its day. It does everything well, but maybe nothing the best. Yes the af on the r3/a1/z9 are a tad better, but it is just that..a tad. Hard to compete with the readout speeds of a stacked sensor. But those are different price points, and (except for the a1) are also much bigger and heavier.

The z8 is going to be a worthy competitor, as is the a7r5...but canon rumors is now talking about next year's r5ii...and if they do to it what they did with the r6ii I think most people will be happy....slightly better performance/speed, more usable electronic shutter, and slightly higher resolution (probably not really needed)...at the same price point as the current list.

Boris_The_Spider wrote:

I have an r5 and the battery life is good enough for me. I also picked up two extra batteries, labelled them, a now cycle through them in order.

That’s nice to hear.😉

richard cohen wrote:

I was a longtime nikon shooter, everything including d500, d850, d4, d3s....and a z6/z7/z7ii....I had a friend who likes to swap very expensive wildlife gear who sold me his r5 and 600f4, and since nikon at that time didn't have anything to compete, I switched. Right now I don't own any nikon bodies although I've kept a few of their lenses around.

The r5 is imo the best all around camera in its price class, just as the d850 was in its day. It does everything well, but maybe nothing the best. Yes the af on the r3/a1/z9 are a tad better, but it is just that..a tad. Hard to compete with the readout speeds of a stacked sensor. But those are different price points, and (except for the a1) are also much bigger and heavier.

The z8 is going to be a worthy competitor, as is the a7r5...but canon rumors is now talking about next year's r5ii...and if they do to it what they did with the r6ii I think most people will be happy....slightly better performance/speed, more usable electronic shutter, and slightly higher resolution (probably not really needed)...at the same price point as the current list.

I am somewhat surprised that the rumour R5ii tops the spec of the flagship Z9. 30 fps in 12-bit raw and 8k 60p are really going to give the Z9 and A1 a run. Given the already great performance of R5, Canon may have a lead on the camera performance next year again.

I am looking forward to buy the R5 at a lower price when the mark 2 comes out. Not going to switch from Nikon Z as (1) I want the Z9 and (2) the Canon L lenses are ridiculously overpriced in my city. I may buy some very cheap non-L lenses to pair with the R5.

Summerjoy wrote:

And you are happy with the battery life?!

well... yes!

that is, for the way i shoot, most of the time having only the evf active and not the screen, that way, when the camera isn't to my eye, it isn't eating up much more battery than a good old dslr, when i want the screen to go on i press the info button.

i do have a spare battery, but i usually get through shoots on one, and carry the 2nd just for peace of mind.

I don't think the r5ii will perform quite up to the a1/z9/r3 because of the lack of a stacked sensor, but it should hopefully be able to close the gap...sticking with the smaller form factor is a huge plus in my book. That's what has kept me from using the z9...

richard cohen wrote:

I don't think the r5ii will perform quite up to the a1/z9/r3 because of the lack of a stacked sensor, but it should hopefully be able to close the gap...sticking with the smaller form factor is a huge plus in my book. That's what has kept me from using the z9...

True.

The 5 series is one class lower than the 3 and two classes lower than the 1. Surprised that Canon chose to upgrade current R5 and R6 first before releasing something higher.

I can relate to the chunkiness of Z9. I tried to hold the camera and 2470 f2.8 Z for a while and my arm was exhausted😂😂. To me the R5 is more similar to a D850 or baby Z9 than the Z7ii. Nikon may release Z8 but it will probably be a camera like the A7R5 which I don't prefer except its screen design.

The R3 is a flagship camera, but it is imo wildly overpriced at $6500 vs the A1 or Z9...both of which perform as well with higher resolution. Imo the Canon lineup should be R6ii at $2500, R5ii at $3900, R3 at $5000 and R1 at $6500...Give or take...:-D

The R3 is already available below $5k.

Wildkits wrote:

Jeff_0000 wrote:

richard cohen wrote:

I don't think the r5ii will perform quite up to the a1/z9/r3 because of the lack of a stacked sensor, but it should hopefully be able to close the gap...sticking with the smaller form factor is a huge plus in my book. That's what has kept me from using the z9...

True.

The 5 series is one class lower than the 3 and two classes lower than the 1. Surprised that Canon chose to upgrade current R5 and R6 first before releasing something higher.

I can relate to the chunkiness of Z9. I tried to hold the camera and 2470 f2.8 Z for a while and my arm was exhausted😂😂. To me the R5 is more similar to a D850 or baby Z9 than the Z7ii. Nikon may release Z8 but it will probably be a camera like the A7R5 which I don't prefer except its screen design.

I've never accepted Canon's claim that the R3 is not a flagship camera. The only thing that keeps it from having that designation is having an SD card slot in place of a second CFE-B slot--and Canon's protestations. Thus, I'd say that the R5 is a class below the R3/Z9/A1 and the vaporware R1. But that is a minor quibble.

I suspect the R3 was going to be the R1, which is the mirrorless version of 1dx. Maybe after realizing what Sony A1 could do, Canon quickly changed the name and took away an CFExpress slot to claim it as R3.

I want a high MP body so R5 is the most suitable choice to me.

Having used the Z9 for almost a year, it balances well with a long prime or superzoom. With a 6+ Lb (3000g+) lens attached, you hardly notice the Z9.

But I don't always shoot with a 400mm/600mm prime. In those situations I much prefer a more compact body, and that's where the R5 excels. If I'm using a small prime, or 70-200 or even 100-500, I don't need the humongous Z9. Frankly I find the Z7 and A7R lines come up rather short as all-purpose cameras. I feel that 15fps is the new minimum for an all-around camera and these two cameras are stuck on 10fps. I'm hoping that Nikon will make the Z8 a junior Z9 and give it at least 15fps. Let the Z7 line be the high resolution body. 40-50MP is all I need and anyone who wants/needs more should wait for an 80-100MP body rather than settle for 61MP.

I would like to see a jump in fps in Z8 as well.

Thus, the R5 stands alone as the best all-around body. It's unfortunate that the L lenses are so expensive, but the f/4 zooms (and 100-400) are truly excellent if you are on a budget.

I went all-in on Canon mirrorless when the R5 came out purchasing the 15-35L, 70-200L, 100-500L, and 85L f/1.2. So, while I find it irritating that Canon has closed its doors to third-parties, it really doesn't impact me--and it's all about me, isn't it? .

yerach wrote:

while there's always a space in my heart for nikon cameras, i'm extremely happy with my move, and will gladly recommend the r5 over any of the above mentioned cameras

hope this was of any help to someone.

My experience is similar to yours, going from the D500 to the R5. My journey started in the 1970s with an OM-1, then OM-2, next to a Canon AE2, then to a Nikon D50, D7000 and finally D500 which I expected to be "the last camera I would ever need" (assuming such ever actually exists). However, I moved back to Canon, and find the R5 out-performing the D500 in all respects.