p.79 #1 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Thank you Geoff for the details.
I'm sure you shoot RAW but in terms of colors, do you see any major difference between the two? I have been shooting Sony for years and though things have improved a lot in newer bodies I still feel that the RAWs require a lot more work (specially in artificial lighting) so I'm hoping that Canon will fix that for me. Since I mostly shoot family outings and trips, I hate sitting through photos and PPing them.
p.79 #2 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Holger wrote:
You get a bit more "digital FL" compared to A9 with 200-600 (around 1.1x), but you need to crop, loosing light gathering area; not nice when iso is high already since aperture is at f7.1 at 500mm already (vs. f6.3 at 600mm for the Sony; + Sony is around "half" the price of the 100-500 ;-)).
Decisions, decisions.
Definitely Sony combo will give you better result (bokeh, noise etc). I was talking more from convenience perspective. It's like going from full frame to crop sensor. I understand that.
p.79 #3 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
arbitrage wrote:
The 200-600 has been the bargin even compared to the Sony 100-400 which is really the closer competitor to the 100-500. However, I think the 200-600 has every bit as good of IQ as the 100-400 and 100-500 so the Sony 100-400 also seems like a poor value these days.
One advantage of the Canon 100-500 and Sony 100-400 is their compactness for transport and lighter weight compared to 200-600:
Sony 200-600 111,5 x 318 mm 2115 g
Canon 100-500 93,8 x 207,6 mm 1530 g
Sony 100-400 93,9 x 205 mm 1395 g
These are collapsed sizes. The 200-600 of course doesn't collapse. ;-)
I don't use these lenses but from my experience with other similarly weighting lenses, I can shoot almost indefinitely with a 1.5 kg lens but a 2.1 kg lens is something I would put down before my hands start to shake. ;-) I think this is probably why the manufacturers can charge a higher price for the 100-500 and 100-400 compared to the 200-600 as many people will choose in favour of portability, especially if they are not specializing in birds. However, it is remarkable that Sony were able to make an internal zoom like the 200-600 at such a price.
p.79 #4 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
ilkka_nissila wrote:
One advantage of the Canon 100-500 and Sony 100-400 is their compactness for transport and lighter weight compared to 200-600:
Sony 200-600 111,5 x 318 mm 2115 g
Canon 100-500 93,8 x 207,6 mm 1530 g
Sony 100-400 93,9 x 205 mm 1395 g
These are collapsed sizes. The 200-600 of course doesn't collapse. ;-)
I don't use these lenses but from my experience with other similarly weighting lenses, I can shoot almost indefinitely with a 1.5 kg lens but a 2.1 kg lens is something I would put down before my hands start to shake. ;-) I think this is probably why the manufacturers can charge a higher price for the 100-500 and 100-400 compared to the 200-600 as many people will choose in favour of portability, especially if they are not specializing in birds. However, it is remarkable that Sony were able to make an internal zoom like the 200-600 at such a price....Show more →
What is amazing about the 200/600 is that is such a bargain & takes TCs really well, rare for such a zoom.
p.79 #5 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
A nice video by Fro on R5 and when it makes sense to switch:
?t=4795
And also a couple of interesting points, to me at least:
* he prefers R5's viewfinder, even compared to A7SIII
* he thinks Sony still has the edge in AF
p.79 #12 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RayinNY wrote:
Using it for B roll slow motion mostly , so perfect for me.
Unless you want to use it for other things, too, I would get the A7siii. Is cheaper, too (esp. if you are invested in Sony already) and a better video tool.
p.79 #13 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Holger wrote:
Unless you want to use it for other things, too, I would get the A7siii. Is cheaper, too (esp. if you are invested in Sony already) and a better video tool.
I expect Canon to put this overheating oven on super sale soon.
p.79 #14 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RayinNY wrote:
I expect Canon to put this overheating oven on super sale soon.
That would be nice! As you indicate, having a "fault", the camera will likely see a revision and slight upgrade to address the 8k temp problem for cumulative exposure. I don't really need video, let alone 8k, but all the stills features are impressive! And the EVF -- I can really use that for MF lenses, like the TSE and Zeiss ZE.
Hope the used price for a lightly used unit gets down to around $2500 in about a year.
p.79 #15 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Gunzorro wrote:
That would be nice! As you indicate, having a "fault", the camera will likely see a revision and slight upgrade to address the 8k temp problem for cumulative exposure. I don't really need video, let alone 8k, but all the stills features are impressive! And the EVF -- I can really use that for MF lenses, like the TSE and Zeiss ZE.
I have been quite impressed with the R and its 30MP sensor. From all reviews I've read, the R5 is a big improvement over the R's DR and has the IBIS I much prefer. I don't see how the R5 could disappoint me, since I am already not using my 5DSR in favor of the R. 45MP is around my sweet spot, like the a7R2 and a7R3. Having shot a bunch of wedding pictures recently with the R and a7R4, I can say the Canon held its own and got some really great shots -- 61MP was pretty much overkill (but the Sony files looked amazing!).
I prefer the flexibility of shooting between Canon and Sony, especially with all the great Canon EF-mount lenses I own. I'm looking forward to gradually accumulating more RF lenses -- don't know if, or how, those might work on Sony, but some are so ground breaking that I just have to have them!
There is no perfect camera, but what we have today between the main manufacturers is pretty great!
p.79 #17 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Gunzorro wrote:
I have been quite impressed with the R and its 30MP sensor. From all reviews I've read, the R5 is a big improvement over the R's DR and has the IBIS I much prefer. I don't see how the R5 could disappoint me, since I am already not using my 5DSR in favor of the R. 45MP is around my sweet spot, like the a7R2 and a7R3. Having shot a bunch of wedding pictures recently with the R and a7R4, I can say the Canon held its own and got some really great shots -- 61MP was pretty much overkill (but the Sony files looked amazing!).
I prefer the flexibility of shooting between Canon and Sony, especially with all the great Canon EF-mount lenses I own. I'm looking forward to gradually accumulating more RF lenses -- don't know if, or how, those might work on Sony, but some are so ground breaking that I just have to have them!
There is no perfect camera, but what we have today between the main manufacturers is pretty great! ...Show more →
I think the R6/R5 are great if you are already a Canon shooter and want to stay, but now with mirrorless. I don't think Canon shooters need to switch now having competitive bodies.
We are heavily invested in Sony with 4 bodies (A9ii, A9, A7riv) and for us it doesn't make sense, as we wouldn't improve what we already have by a significant margin or at all.
I don't rely on IBIS nor am I a serious bird shooter, requiring AI animal focus options, so two of the options Canon clearly improved aren't of interest to me.
If you are already invested, it is a different story of course. The A7riv is a great body but not a perfect wedding body in my opinion. The A9ii is the one to go for this in my opinion (or the R5/R6 as a Canon shooter) esp. due to the still unmatched e-shutter.
Some of the new R-lenses are quite nice, but I am not interested in zooms at all and the 35/1.2 is perfectly provided by Sigma at the moment. So only wanting the 50R doesn't make a switch reasonable ;-) (and I am sure a Sony or Sigma 50/1.2 will be available in the near future).
p.79 #18 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
Holger wrote:
I think the R6/R5 are great if you are already a Canon shooter and want to stay, but now with mirrorless. I don't think Canon shooters need to switch now having competitive bodies.
We are heavily invested in Sony with 4 bodies (A9ii, A9, A7riv) and for us it doesn't make sense, as we wouldn't improve what we already have by a significant margin or at all.
I don't rely on IBIS nor am I a serious bird shooter, requiring AI animal focus options, so two of the options Canon clearly improved aren't of interest to me.
If you are already invested, it is a different story of course. The A7riv is a great body but not a perfect wedding body in my opinion. The A9ii is the one to go for this in my opinion (or the R5/R6 as a Canon shooter) esp. due to the still unmatched e-shutter.
Some of the new R-lenses are quite nice, but I am not interested in zooms at all and the 35/1.2 is perfectly provided by Sigma at the moment. So only wanting the 50R doesn't make a switch reasonable ;-) (and I am sure a Sony or Sigma 50/1.2 will be available in the near future). ...Show more →
Your approach makes perfect sense.
I am more invested in Sony imaging at this point, with two a7R2's and the a7R4. But I still prefer the form-factor and menus of Canon, and of course, love so many of their L lens designs. I'm that rare omnivorous photo-bird, feeding on three brands (Nikon, too, somewhat).
Shooting 95% hand held, IBIS is critical to me for low light or small aperture shooting. At the moment, it appears the R5 has industry leading IS when coupled with Canon IS lenses (supposedly 8 stops!). So, that has me particularly keen on the model.
Too bad my Loxia lenses only work on Sony! Oh well, I'll always have at least one Sony body for those, ha-ha!
p.79 #19 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
RoamingScott wrote:
A sale won't fix the video overheating
And a sale still won't fix how pricey the lenses are! I really like what Canon is doing with the optics of their RF lenses but man, that's some pricey L glass. $3500 CDN for a prime is getting to the point where the only people that will shoot it will be people with far greater incomes than me. Their non-L glass is looking good but one of the great things about the Canon SLR system was there was always semi-affordable L glass. Maybe Canon is fleshing out the super high end first and we'll see some more affordable L glass in the future? If so, that would tempt me.
p.79 #20 · Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6
If you compare equivalent RF lenses to EF lenses, the RF versions are winning handily in terms of IQ and might be worth the money to a purely Canon shooter. However, when you compare them to even GM E lenses, you don’t get a lot more for that price difference.
Dave Sanders wrote:
And a sale still won't fix how pricey the lenses are! I really like what Canon is doing with the optics of their RF lenses but man, that's some pricey L glass. $3500 CDN for a prime is getting to the point where the only people that will shoot it will be people with far greater incomes than me. Their non-L glass is looking good but one of the great things about the Canon SLR system was there was always semi-affordable L glass. Maybe Canon is fleshing out the super high end first and we'll see some more affordable L glass in the future? If so, that would tempt me. ...Show more →
Oh well, I'll always have at least one Sony body for those, ha-ha!