p.66 #1 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
ajamils wrote:
Arbitrage, thank for the detailed review. It has ignited my curiosity for R5 again. Currently have A7r4 and few Sony lenses but my primary shooting is travel and family photography with some wildlife/BIF thrown in the mix. Do you think R5 would be better suited for that?
I might have missed it but what are these abbreviations? AED, RTT, USSP?
AED: Animal Eye Detect
RTT: Real-time Tracking
USSP: User Selected Starting Point
I think I'd just stick with the RIV for your use. The R5 would be excellent also but probably not worth switching for. If there are certain Canon lenses you really like and would value more than your Sony ones then you could think about the R5 as an option.
p.66 #2 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
JohnDizzo15 wrote:
Thanks for your impressions. This seems to reflect what I was hoping users would find which is why I wanted the R5 as a replacement to my A7R3 to go alongside my A9 instead of the A7R4.
A9(II) and R5 combo would be the best combo out there. Only issue is having to outfit all the different lenses between systems. I'm still considering selling RIV and getting R5 but now that I've been getting the RIV to work well with 200-600 I'm leaning back to just sticking with the all Sony combo.
p.66 #3 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Geoff,
Did you experience any overheating issues shooting stills only? What's your take on overheating on the R5 if you only shoot stills?
Thanks so much for sharing your perspective!
Lon
p.66 #4 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
arbitrage wrote:
A9(II) and R5 combo would be the best combo out there.
That's a very puzzling statement that I can't make much sense of.
The A9ii and A7R4 would be a far superior combo for their respective use cases...A9 for BIF/action/RTT, and A7R4 for slower moving, detail rich shots (not to say the R4 is a slouch at action, just clearly not in the A9 type league).
The A7R4 sensor 1) has no AA filter and 2) doesn't need baked in noise reduction at all ISOs to render a beautiful image. Further, you'd share 100% of your lenses and batteries between the two cameras. The A7R4 has considerably longer battery life as well and a not-unsubstantial resolution boost over the R5. And with the $1100 you save getting an R4 instead of the R5, you can buy some sweet glass.
I don't think a more complete system than the A9ii and A7R4 exists between 2 cameras in the world right now.
p.66 #7 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
A9Lon wrote:
Geoff,
Did you experience any overheating issues shooting stills only? What's your take on overheating on the R5 if you only shoot stills?
Thanks so much for sharing your perspective!
Lon
No, I didn't even think about heat ever. Heat is not going to be an issue for stills unless you want to shoot stills for 2 hrs and then plan on some 8K or 4K 120 after you are done.
p.66 #8 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
That's a very puzzling statement that I can't make much sense of.
The A9ii and A7R4 would be a far superior combo for their respective use cases...A9 for BIF/action/RTT, and A7R4 for slower moving, detail rich shots (not to say the R4 is a slouch at action, just clearly not in the A9 type league).
The A7R4 sensor 1) has no AA filter and 2) doesn't need baked in noise reduction at all ISOs to render a beautiful image. Further, you'd share 100% of your lenses and batteries between the two cameras. The A7R4 has considerably longer battery life as well and a not-unsubstantial resolution boost over the R5. And with the $1100 you save getting an R4 instead of the R5, you can buy some sweet glass.
I don't think a more complete system than the A9ii and A7R4 exists between 2 cameras in the world right now.
For my type of photography I think for a high MP camera the R5 is better in every single way that matters to me over the RIV. So if I wanted two cameras...one for high MP with best possible AF and one for best ultimate AF I would choose the R5/A9II. If you value other things than me then that won't be the best combo and the RIV/A9II makes sense. The RIV does nothing better than the R5 for my use. I do not care about low ISO NR as I don't shoot at those ISOs, I do not care about 45 vs 61MPs.
The battery life is not considerably longer on the Sony's. Forget the CIPA numbers...real life was very close between the two cameras.
p.66 #9 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
That's a very puzzling statement that I can't make much sense of.
The A9ii and A7R4 would be a far superior combo for their respective use cases...A9 for BIF/action/RTT, and A7R4 for slower moving, detail rich shots (not to say the R4 is a slouch at action, just clearly not in the A9 type league).
The A7R4 sensor 1) has no AA filter and 2) doesn't need baked in noise reduction at all ISOs to render a beautiful image. Further, you'd share 100% of your lenses and batteries between the two cameras. The A7R4 has considerably longer battery life as well and a not-unsubstantial resolution boost over the R5. And with the $1100 you save getting an R4 instead of the R5, you can buy some sweet glass.
I don't think a more complete system than the A9ii and A7R4 exists between 2 cameras in the world right now.
However, there are some oddball cases (mine being one of them).
As stated previously, the bodies are half the equation. There are some of us that still maintain Canon EF glass that we want to be able to use across multiple systems with at least at least one offering true native performance without caveats.
While Sony makes plenty good glass, I'm not particularly a fan of most of the lineup when it comes to look produced and/or general performance.
Some of my favorite lenses are the EF mount Sigma 20/1.4, 105/1.4, and a Canon 300/2.8 (amongst others). Been using these with both the Sony and Fuji systems but have already recently begun enjoying them more with the RP (waiting for R5).
Additionally, I had been wanting to try the RF 50 and 28-70 which I have now been using on the RP which has confirmed my suspicions...they're awesome.
My favorite FE mount lens is the Sigma 35/1.2. I now only have this and a few of the Sony compact primes as far as FE goes.
So realistically, my desire for the R5 is more based in lens selection than simply comparing body specs. As I've stated previously, I only needed the R5 to be close to the Sony R3-R4 in certain areas of performance which is why I haven't been overly concerned about splitting hairs over this spec or that spec. The Canon certainly seems to have accomplished that and then some in certain facets.
Now, I can have my cake and eat it too as I'll have the handful of native lenses I love from Sony, Fuji, Canon RF, and a handful of EF lenses I'll be able to use across all three systems with one offering native performance.
p.66 #10 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
I would assume you’re shooting in 70 degree weather. Some of us get a bit hotter in August
arbitrage wrote:
No, I didn't even think about heat ever. Heat is not going to be an issue for stills unless you want to shoot stills for 2 hrs and then plan on some 8K or 4K 120 after you are done.
p.66 #11 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
arbitrage wrote:
For my type of photography I think for a high MP camera the R5 is better in every single way that matters to me over the RIV. So if I wanted two cameras...one for high MP with best possible AF and one for best ultimate AF I would choose the R5/A9II. If you value other things than me then that won't be the best combo and the RIV/A9II makes sense. The RIV does nothing better than the R5 for my use. I do not care about low ISO NR as I don't shoot at those ISOs, I do not care about 45 vs 61MPs.
The battery life is not considerably longer on the Sony's. Forget the CIPA numbers...real life was very close between the two cameras....Show more →
I could see your point if we are talking strictly about the cameras. But then there are lenses involved; it simply doesn’t make sense to have two different sets of lenses. It is not a matter of being able to afford them but simply from the logistic point of view, it would be very cumbersome to use 2 sets of lenses. But more power to you, if you can and is willing to pull it off. Adding Canon R5 doesn’t even cross my mind , let alone considering it. But to each his/her own...
I understand John’s @JohnDizzo15 situation since he has a set of Canon lenses that he adapts to be used on Sony’s body or bodies. He is not a bird photographer and he doesn’t need long lenses that will have to be adapted and as such, he doesn’t need native Sony AF performance with those lenses.
p.66 #12 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
AGeoJO wrote:
I could see your point if we are talking strictly about the cameras. But then there are lenses involved; it simply doesn’t make sense to have two different sets of lenses. It is not a matter of being able to afford them but simply from the logistic point of view, it would be very cumbersome to use 2 sets of lenses. But more power to you, if you can and is willing to pull it off. Adding Canon R5 doesn’t even cross my mind , let alone considering it. But to each his/her own...
I understand John’s @JohnDizzo15@ situation since he has a set of Canon lenses that he adapts to be used on Sony’s body or bodies. He is not a bird photographer and he doesn’t need long lenses that will have to be adapted and as such, he doesn’t need native Sony AF performance with those lenses. ...Show more →
No arguments there. I already shoot 2-3 systems and I own 5 Canon lenses still. Although I don't own any Canon birding lenses anymore so that is why I haven't splurged on my own R5 yet. I wouldn't really expect anyone (other than myself and a few other crazy people on here) to actually run an R5/A9II combo. There is no doubt that sticking with one system and sharing the lenses across A9/A7RIV makes a lot more sense. Especially now that my 200-600 seems to work on the RIV.
p.66 #13 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
arbitrage wrote:
No arguments there. I already shoot 2-3 systems and I own 5 Canon lenses still. Although I don't own any Canon birding lenses anymore so that is why I haven't splurged on my own R5 yet. I wouldn't really expect anyone (other than myself and a few other crazy people on here) to actually run an R5/A9II combo. There is no doubt that sticking with one system and sharing the lenses across A9/A7RIV makes a lot more sense. Especially now that my 200-600 seems to work on the RIV.
Haha, I know someone really well that has and actually uses Sony A9 and Canon R5. Personally, I would rather know the ins and outs of a system well where I can make any adjustment necessary out in the field to make some rare shooting opportunities count rather than fumble around trying to figure how to do what.
The question to you now, Geoff, what will you do if Sony introduces the A9r or whatever they will call it with a 36-42MP stacked sensor? You know that Sony is not standing idle right now...
p.66 #15 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Kinda surprise Sony didn't announce the a9r already to take the wind out of Canon sails and the R5.
After the A9II release I no longer have any idea whatsoever of what to expect from Sony in the future. Usually their cameras are impressive but that has to be the lamest release I ever seen from any camera maker.
Thanks for the review. Are there any issues with the R5 and TCs or did they work as seamlessly (with no reduction in AF drive speed) as they do on Sony?
p.66 #17 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
There is still no camera that can do what the A9 can do, so why would they waste a tech leap forward when they are already the market leader? It was a good refinement release that catered to wire shooters, although I think they missed a good opportunity to price it more aggressively.
randomguy wrote:
After the A9II release I no longer have any idea whatsoever of what to expect from Sony in the future. Usually their cameras are impressive but that has to be the lamest release I ever seen from any camera maker.
p.66 #18 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
There is still no camera that can do what the A9 can do, so why would they waste a tech leap forward when they are already the market leader? It was a good refinement release that catered to wire shooters, although I think they missed a good opportunity to price it more aggressively.
My personal opinion is: to stay ahead and prevent ending up in the situation they are now, people jumping ship to competition like the R5 which is close enough in performance in most situations and provide much better video, resolution and animal AF. We have no idea where the A9 series is going in the future, perhaps it is going to be 24MP and tailored for PJs forever? I certainly hope not.
p.66 #19 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
arbitrage wrote:
No arguments there. I already shoot 2-3 systems and I own 5 Canon lenses still. Although I don't own any Canon birding lenses anymore so that is why I haven't splurged on my own R5 yet. I wouldn't really expect anyone (other than myself and a few other crazy people on here) to actually run an R5/A9II combo. There is no doubt that sticking with one system and sharing the lenses across A9/A7RIV makes a lot more sense. Especially now that my 200-600 seems to work on the RIV.
Yes, I’m one of those crazy guys if you consider owning a R5 and a9 as a qualifier? My a7riv went bye bye weeks ago. Interestingly, your observations were strikingly similar to those I had posted earlier in this thread. It is reassuring to see I wasn’t the only one disappointed by the buttons and inability to assign broad functions to them as well. The only reason I purchased an R5 is that I still own many long EF lenses. For those who don’t, I would stick with the a9ii/a7riv combination.
With respect to stickiness, hopefully with some tweaks, the R5 can be made to improve. Turning down the af sensitivity helped significantly. I look at all of these innovations as marvelous opportunities.
Thanks for the review. Are there any issues with the R5 and TCs or did they work as seamlessly (with no reduction in AF drive speed) as they do on Sony?
That’s hard to say as canon has just released the R mount tc’s. What I have observed is that the af is blazingly fast withe adapted ef lenses and ef tc’s. For fun I placed a 2x iii tc on the 100-400 is ii lens and it too was remarkably quick.
, let alone considering it. But to each his/her own...