p.1 #2 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
I have both. But only have four R5 days under my belt. 2 with my own camera and 2 days borrowed from a friend before I decided to buy my own.
I'm coming at this from a bird photographer's standpoint so this could totally differ if you are into other things like landscapes or people or street or travel etc.
The things I value most in cameras is AF, button customization, ergonomics in the hand and lens selection. Then of course is the IQ from the sensor and because I do birds I often do try and go for higher resolution cameras for cropping reach. That said I'm usually more happy with a longer lens and a lower MP sensor like my A9, 1DX type bodies. Still, I do always seem to own a higher pixel density body alongside my lower light bodies.
I fell the R5 is slightly better in the hand with the grip. R5 is slightly taller so my full pinky is supported. A7RIV supports half my pinky. I use battery grips so none of that matters to me. The R5 has more room between grip and lens. The R5 has slightly better feeling grip material.
The R5's back buttons are vastly inferior to the A7RIV/A9II/A7SIII. They are small, recessed and hard to tell one from the other with just feel alone. They are more like A9/A7RIII/A7III buttons. The R5's lower rear scroll wheel is nicer and bigger but lacks the 4 way direction buttons that adds more button customization to the Sony.
The Sony still wins on button customization but the R5 has a lot of powerful options and customization so it is still pretty good.
AF on the R5 is better than the RIV. For some things it is better than the A9II but not for everything.
ES 20FPS has way less distortion than the A7RIV's slow readout.
12FPS EFCS/MS is better than 10FPS. 20FPS ES is better than 10FPS.
EFCS is much nicer sounding with the R5 vs A7RIV.
IQ is close...I can't say one way or the other yet. 61 is better than 45 if I'm trying to crop. I shoot both cameras in APS-C mode every chance I get to minimize file sizes, have a magnified view of my subject in the EVF and make culling quicker going shot to shot at 1:1. There are lots of places online like DPReview comparison widget where you can fully compare the IQ between them and DR and ISO-lessness with downloaded RAW files.
Available lenses is in favour of the Sony because I love my 200-600 but also in favour of the R5 because you can flawlessly adapt the entire EF catalogue. I've also adapted EF to Sony but there are always significant compromises in AF for long lenses. Right now I already own the 600GM so I have to favour my Sony system as I have a better lens lineup for it currently. But of course I could swap a 600GM for a 600III and be equal. I have the RF 100-500 which is nice for closeup focusing and lighter weight but otherwise the 200-600 is a better lens for my use case despite its' weight.
Happy to try and answer more specific things if I can. Most likely my A7RIV will be going up for sale soon but my A9II won't be.
p.1 #5 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
^^ I haven't tested by side but when I look at my Sony A75IV I don't see the yellow like you getting in the video. I use C1 and now having used Sony for a while (previous canon shooter) and Fuji for 5+ yrs the differences are very small. Now when I do look at online shots from A7rIII I see the greenish/yellowish cast on most. Maybe I need to do side by side like you.
p.1 #6 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
Unless you already have a big bag of Canon L-series lenses, I can't see the point... you will either have to wait 5 or 6 years for Canon to fill out their RF lens line, or invest in buying expensive but obsolete EF-mount glass and using it on an adapter. I went through that with Sony, and wouldn't have the patience to do it again with another brand, especially when it's for little or no gain.
p.1 #8 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
Screenbyte wrote:
Hi all.
I hope you are all well and staying safe.
I was wondering if any SonyRIV users have tried or even purchased and Canon R5?
If you have what's your thoughts and opinions please regarding all
aspects of the Canon compared to Sony.
I tried it at a local dealer. My time with it was limited and I didn't see anything swaying me back to Canon. Nevertheless, I think a much longer shooting period would be required to really be able to judge both cameras. A great camera for Canon shooters.
So far, I don't see any reason to switch back (having A9ii, A9, A7riv), too heavily invested. The A7riv might not be the BIF high MP camera, which I am not interested in anyway. However it is a fantastic camera which we now used for many weddings and paid shootings and it delivers.
When heavily invested in Sony, stay with A7riv, otherwise if you have a lot of Canon glass, get the R5. Right now the Sony systems offers a lot of native glass and many third party options. Would be more important to me. Shooting two systems in parallel might be of interest to some, for events and weddings it is not worth it, too much extra work in getting the output consistent and having to deal with muscle memory in a once in a lifetime moment.
p.1 #9 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
Eh, I don't think those are the only two options - there are a ton of very good, but affordable EF lenses. The difference between adapting EF glass to R mount bodies and doing the same on Sony is that EF glass functions as native glass, and is very good.
I have a secondary RF system. And rather than shell out for the 15-35/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 in RF mount, I got the $600 Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 and a used 70-200/4L IS. Total cost was $1100 and they focus extremely well and are great optically. Also, the 17-35 is smaller and lighter with the adapter than the RF 15-35.
molson wrote:
Unless you already have a big bag of Canon L-series lenses, I can't see the point... you will either have to wait 5 or 6 years for Canon to fill out their RF lens line, or invest in buying expensive but obsolete EF-mount glass and using it on an adapter. I went through that with Sony, and wouldn't have the patience to do it again with another brand, especially when it's for little or no gain.
p.1 #10 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
Jman13 wrote:
Eh, I don't think those are the only two options - there are a ton of very good, but affordable EF lenses. The difference between adapting EF glass to R mount bodies and doing the same on Sony is that EF glass functions as native glass, and is very good.
I have a secondary RF system. And rather than shell out for the 15-35/2.8 and 70-200/2.8 in RF mount, I got the $600 Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 and a used 70-200/4L IS. Total cost was $1100 and they focus extremely well and are great optically. Also, the 17-35 is smaller and lighter with the adapter than the RF 15-35.
If I wanted to use glass like that, I wouldn't be wasting money on any high-end camera body.
Now if you could find a ton of "very good, but affordable" third-generation big whites or the current version TS-E lenses, you might be on to something...
p.1 #11 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
At one time I was committed to Canon with a lot of lenses and buying a new body every second year. However, I never quite got what I wanted no matter what I spent due to rampant feature rationing. I switched to Nikon when they brought out their first FF camera the D3.
The Nikon sensor was miles ahead of Canon through the D5. Then I switched to the Sony A9 as it was so advanced over CaNikon. Now Canon has some interesting cameras but not a full complement of lenses and Sony is on the threshold or releasing an A9r or A9 III.
The only reason Canon has a well priced mirrorless camera is to compete with Sony. Just when Sony was ready to release their A9 MKII they gave away a profound FW upgrade for the A9 MKI. CaNikon would never have done that. I would have had to buy all new cameras (4 of them). I’m sticking with Sony.
p.1 #12 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
I also have both cameras and agree with Arbitrage’s post above -- that covered everything nicely. I'm still in the decision phase as to which camera(s) I will keep because I've yet to really find a major advantage one has over the other. They both have some minor benefits that are all personal preferences and subjective. For example, I have big hands so I actually like the grip of the R5 over the A7RIV. The touch screen is nice on the R5 but I'm not a vlogger so I prefer the tilt screen over the flip screen. C1 on the A7RIV is my crop mode shortcut and I love the idea of getting 26mp and a perceived zoom with just a press of a button. I believe there is a bigger crop with the R5 at 1.6 leaving you with 17mp -- still not bad.
I prefer not to adapt lenses so Canon has a ways to go (in my opinion) to populate their RF inventory. But the EF lens selection is there if you can find an EF to RF adapter. If money is not a problem for you, the current RF glass line up is VERY impressive. I would love for Sigma to start producing RF glass at a similar cost to FE glass. In any case, I recommend you rent one of each camera bodies (perhaps at the same time) and use them shooting your normal, primary targets to determine which you prefer.
p.1 #13 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
JayPhoto1 wrote:
I also have both cameras and agree with Arbitrage’s post above -- that covered everything nicely. I'm still in the decision phase as to which camera(s) I will keep because I've yet to really find a major advantage one has over the other. They both have some minor benefits that are all personal preferences and subjective. For example, I have big hands so I actually like the grip of the R5 over the A7RIV. The touch screen is nice on the R5 but I'm not a vlogger so I prefer the tilt screen over the flip screen. C1 on the A7RIV is my crop mode shortcut and I love the idea of getting 26mp and a perceived zoom with just a press of a button. I believe there is a bigger crop with the R5 at 1.6 leaving you with 17mp -- still not bad.
I prefer not to adapt lenses so Canon has a ways to go (in my opinion) to populate their RF inventory. But the EF lens selection is there if you can find an EF to RF adapter. If money is not a problem for you, the current RF glass line up is VERY impressive. I would love for Sigma to start producing RF glass at a similar cost to FE glass. In any case, I recommend you rent one of each camera bodies (perhaps at the same time) and use them shooting your normal, primary targets to determine which you prefer. ...Show more →
I always use battery grip or a RRS arca swiss base plate with the Sonys. I find that ergonomically great and although having large hands, too, can't complain about ergonomics.
I strongly prefer the Sony controls, too. Two wheels on top to control SS and aperture and ISO with the back selector wheel. Tons of programmed function buttons, too. I don't like the Canon wheel and button placement as much anymore, I would prefer Nikon over Canon as they are similiar in that respect to Sony. Subjective, but my preference.
p.1 #16 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
Holger wrote:
I always use battery grip or a RRS arca swiss base plate with the Sonys. I find that ergonomically great and although having large hands, too, can't complain about ergonomics.
I strongly prefer the Sony controls, too. Two wheels on top to control SS and aperture and ISO with the back selector wheel. Tons of programmed function buttons, too. I don't like the Canon wheel and button placement as much anymore, I would prefer Nikon over Canon as they are similiar in that respect to Sony. Subjective, but my preference.
But the R5 has those same three wheels now. Just lacking the dedicated EC wheel. And you can choose to assign aperture, SS, ISO or EC to any of the three wheels. There is no shooting mode where you need all four anyways.
My personal preference is to have SS on the front wheel, ISO on the upper wheel and aperture on the lower wheel. With the R5 I set that once and forget about it. With the Sony I can set it up to do that via My Dial but I always have to toggle into My Dial every time I power on the camera...just super annoying extra step that doesn't need to be there. Just let me set the wheels how I want and keep them like that...why Sony, why??
p.1 #17 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
arbitrage wrote:
But the R5 has those same three wheels now. Just lacking the dedicated EC wheel. And you can choose to assign aperture, SS, ISO or EC to any of the three wheels. There is no shooting mode where you need all four anyways.
My personal preference is to have SS on the front wheel, ISO on the upper wheel and aperture on the lower wheel. With the R5 I set that once and forget about it. With the Sony I can set it up to do that via My Dial but I always have to toggle into My Dial every time I power on the camera...just super annoying extra step that doesn't need to be there. Just let me set the wheels how I want and keep them like that...why Sony, why??...Show more →
That is indeed unfortunate and would be an easy fix.
I use ISO with the selector wheel. I found this Canon wheel to be a bit too low to easily change settings with my thumb, owing to the larger body compared to the Sony.
For me, personally, I think that the average pro now doesn't need to switch companies. A Canon shooter now has fantastic options, similar to Sony shooters.
I guess Nikons second iteration to be announced shortly will provide us with nice options, too.
p.1 #18 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
baltmin wrote:
Could you clarify in what circumstances the R5 AF wins and in what the A9 wins?
Still early days but I think that the R5 is easier to use for perching birds, floating birds, foraging birds because of the Animal Eye AF that works on the birds. It is quicker to just aim the camera and push the AF button, it finds the eye and sticks and you can go about recomposing. I find I can react faster to a fleeting moment where a bird perches for just a few seconds and then moves on as I just let the system take over. Sometimes you can do this on the A9 in Wide mode but it doesn't always get your intended subject correct. Also if there are distractions around the bird, the R5 can often recognize the bird and goes to Eye detect ignoring all the distractions. On the A9 I'd usually have to go to a Small Flex Spot and if the bird is large enough in the frame, take the time to move that Flex Spot to the head.
I still feel the A9 has some advantage at uncannily picking up the moving subject in Wide and Zone AF modes for smaller, faster BIF. I also feel that once the A9 has your intended target it rarely gets distracted by anything else. I find the R5 to sometimes have a harder time finding that fast moving bird and getting started with the AF. I also find that the R5 will get distracted by a bright spot in the background and drop off the bird. On larger, slower birds the R5 probably has the advantage because then the Bird Eye AF often works and it then ignores the near wing which an A9 in Wide or even Zone AF can jump to as it tracks the larger bird along. Especially if the larger bird is filling a lot of the frame and DOF isn't enough to cover the near wing and the head/body.
When the R5 did properly pick up some small, fast birds it wasn't getting as high of a hit rate in the burst of shots. But I haven't had too many small/fast BIF to test on. So far I've shot some Brewer's Blackbirds and some Black Turnstones. My favourite test subject are Violet-green and Barn swallows but they won't return to my area till next spring so that will have to wait.
I'll be doing a lot more testing on the wintering ducks soon but I feel both cameras will excel at ducks. I'll also be doing more owl and harrier shooting soon, but again, both cameras will likely have no issues with that.
p.1 #19 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
GabrielPhoto wrote:
While I plan to get the R5 again, here are two videos I did testing it vs my A7Riv from a portrait shooter perspective.
&feature=youtu.be
&feature=youtu.be
Thanks for the videos, Luis!
You have been confirming that Canon R5 may be a good choice for me in situations where I want more "pop" in contrast and color, and don't need 61MP. 40-45MP seems a sweet spot for me, but who can ever have too many MP?
I currently have two a7R2's which are hardly getting any use as I concentrate on the wonderful a7R4 for the bulk of my shooting. But I picked up a Canon R and have been very happy with the results (considering that it is an intro mirrorless FF camera, with only 30MP), and have been hoping for the sort of results I'm seeing here with your use of the R5 compared to the Sony. Eventually, I'm sure to get an R5, and probably rely on that along with the a7R4 for almost all my shooting needs.
So far, I only have the native RF 24-105L IS lens, but all my Canon EF "L" lenses work great on the R body via the EF-RF adapter -- slightly better than on the Sony via MC-11, but that isn't a big issue for the types of shots I usually take. I expect these lenses to work even better on R5 body, and your results seem to indicate a high probability of doing so. It is important to me to continue using my cache of "obsolete" Canon EF lenses, many of which have no equivalents in other brands that I can easily and reliably adapt (Canon TSE vs. Nikon PC-E, for example).
p.1 #20 · Any A7RIV users tried or brought the Canon R5
I just got the R6 in for review, and one thing I will definitely say about these cameras: the IBIS is quite remarkable. We're talking 0.5" shots at 50mm and 85mm that are sharp. On my A7R IV, I'm lucky if I get 1/20s sharp at 85mm. With the RF 35/1.8 and IS in conjunction with the IBIS, I was able to get 2-3 second exposures sharp handheld, and with my RF 24-105mm f/4L, I was able to hand hold at 24mm at FOUR SECONDS.
If money is not a problem for you, the current RF glass line up is VERY impressive. I would love for Sigma to start producing RF glass at a similar cost to FE glass. In any case, I recommend you rent one of each camera bodies (perhaps at the same time) and use them shooting your normal, primary targets to determine which you prefer. 