The Master is certainly good at making condescending comments all over the board, but has very thin skin when they are directed at him/her. JMO, of course!
dwweiche wrote:
The Master is certainly good at making condescending comments all over the board, but has very thin skin when they are directed at him/her. JMO, of course!
And who cares about your opinion, with your condescending and ignorant The Master comment?
ct1co2 wrote:
Interesting observation. There is no doubt the R5 thread here and on another forum I am on has a lot more volume of great work posted. I've not contributed as much here as elsewhere. Speaking for myself, I see the heavy focus on wildlife or living things that move. My interest is often that, and I really enjoy what is shared and use to try and learn to better my own skills in whatever time I am able to make to get out and shoot. I often hesitate to post here as I'm not always sure what resonates with me, is meaningful to others, or get's to a level of being seen as something beyond just a snapshot. I also don't want to turn it into my own personal thread and would love to see more traffic here. ...Show more →
Thanks, good to discuss it without any rants from those that can't handle reasonable comments.
Your images look great, and better than some others I have seen on this thread. God forbid that one can say that.
Myself and others that may be interested in buying either camera often compare images on the two threads to help them decide which may be best for their needs. Considering the R6 is a lot less expensive, I would have thought sales of the R6 would be greater than the R5, hence more images posted on the R6 thread. Unless someone can provide a direct link to an OFFICIAL Canon document showing total sales of both, I am not about to believe anyone else's numbers.
The Master is also someone who goes into people's profiles to find something to use as a thinly veiled insult to a poster. I've seen that at least twice, so yes, totally normal forum behavior!
Jman13 wrote:
I think you raise some points here that are largely irrelevant.
Could well be and I have no problem hearing what they are.
First, this is an enthusiast forum, and as such, the proportion of people who purchased the R5 compared to the R6 is significantly higher...which is why you see a lot more photos posted there. I also don't see any reliably different level of quality of images between the two threads. Owning both, I post in both threads, though I do tend to bring my R5 for most serious outings, because of the higher resolution.
As I posted above, please provide a link to an OFFICIAL Canon document showing total sales of both cameras. You may not see any reliably different level of quality of images between the two threads, but I do. Yet you use your R5 for more serious outings.
Having extensive experience with both cameras, they are so similar in usability and operation that it's barely worth discussing. Autofocus is identical between them. IBIS performance is identical. Image quality is extremely similar...with the R5 being
So the main advantage for MOST R5 owners appears to be more megapixels, at a cost of $1400 more. Considering this, I have yet to see any side-by-side comparison images taken under the same conditions that show the R5 images look $1400 better.
Oh, and the hide me button is really great here. I'll be scrolling though a thread on my phone and generally never notice the hidden posts and 'quoted' posts that are in fact very well hidden from view. It's made my experience here VASTLY better when you don't need to read posts from the grumpiest, most humorless person on FM.
dwweiche wrote:
The Master is also someone who goes into people's profiles to find something to use as a thinly veiled insult to a poster. I've seen that at least twice, so yes, totally normal forum behavior!
This is all JMO, of course!
And the WWhiner is just a natural insulter. Your typical contribution to most threads. HIDE ME suits you. You will have to insult someone else to make you feel better.
Imagemaster wrote:
As I posted above, please provide a link to an OFFICIAL Canon document showing total sales of both cameras. You may not see any reliably different level of quality of images between the two threads, but I do. Yet you use your R5 for more serious outings.
I don't see what official Canon numbers have to do with anything. It is quite obvious simply from the amount of photos posted, that the R5 is more popular among FredMiranda members. However, there is no way anyone can say that FM is representative of the photographic community at large.
I use my R5 for more serious outings because, yes, overall it is the slightly better camera for what I shoot, and I primarily shoot landscape and architecture, where the extra resolution can come in handy (though I have shot landscape with R6 and gotten great shots). For events / candids, I find both cameras do just fine, and I grab the R6 just as much as the R5 for those types of shots. I shoot the occasional wildlife / bird photo, where the R5 gives a little extra croppability, but wouldn't hesitate to use either from an AF perspective, as I have noticed no difference between them in that regard.
So the main advantage for MOST R5 owners appears to be more megapixels, at a cost of $1400 more. Considering this, I have yet to see any side-by-side comparison images taken under the same conditions that show the R5 images look $1400 better.
In my experience, yes. As I mentioned earlier, there are a few other minor benefits for stills shooters, with the higher resolution EVF and larger rear screen. Video, of course, has a bit more to differentiate them, but I couldn't care less about video.
I also would say that it is hard to say that R5 images look $1400 better, especially at web resolution. The difference may be seen on large prints, or if you have to crop a lot. Otherwise, I find both cameras to be exceedingly capable.
Imagemaster wrote:
Could well be and I have no problem hearing what they are.
As I posted above, please provide a link to an OFFICIAL Canon document showing total sales of both cameras. You may not see any reliably different level of quality of images between the two threads, but I do. Yet you use your R5 for more serious outings.
So the main advantage for MOST R5 owners appears to be more megapixels, at a cost of $1400 more. Considering this, I have yet to see any side-by-side comparison images taken under the same conditions that show the R5 images look $1400 better.
As for the difference in the quality of images between the two threads I'm not sure as I don't have time to scroll through them but what I can say is that shooting the R5/R6 side by side they are the same camera with the only difference being resolution (or video specs). So if you see a good image in the R5 thread you know that same image could have been captured with the R6 unless it was heavily cropped. The page you referenced in the R5 thread has a lot of wildlife images and it makes sense that the R5 would be used more often. It appears to me that 90% of this forum seems to be birders, so yeah the R5 would be their camera of choice.
As for me, I rarely need the resolution so I bought two R6's. I have access to an R5 anytime I want but I rarely use it. IMO, unless you really need the R5 resolution, the R6 is the best value on the market at the moment. It's the first all-in-one canon camera for my shooting style that's not intentionally crippled and it's very affordable.
FYI - the price difference between the R5 and R6 for most people is closer to $1744.86 depending on where you live. I get this from the R5 being $3899 from BH with payboo and the R6 being $2154.14 after tax from Canon (CLP) where I live in CA. So the price for the extra resolution is more like $1700+
Jman13 wrote:
I also would say that it is hard to say that R5 images look $1400 better, especially at web resolution. The difference may be seen on large prints, or if you have to crop a lot. Otherwise, I find both cameras to be exceedingly capable.
Thanks, for sharing your experience from actually owning both cameras. It wasn't so hard, was it, despite the whining of a couple of detractors/flamers?
artsupreme wrote:
As for the difference in the quality of images between the two threads I'm not sure as I don't have time to scroll through them but what I can say is that shooting the R5/R6 side by side they are the same camera with the only difference being resolution (or video specs). So if you see a good image in the R5 thread you know that same image could have been captured with the R6 unless it was heavily cropped. The page you referenced in the R5 thread has a lot of wildlife images and it makes sense that the R5 would be used more often. It appears to me that 90% of this forum seems to be birders, so yeah the R5 would be their camera of choice.
As for me, I rarely need the resolution so I bought two R6's. I have access to an R5 anytime I want but I rarely use it. IMO, unless you really need the R5 resolution, the R6 is the best value on the market at the moment. It's the first all-in-one canon camera for my shooting style that's not intentionally crippled and it's very affordable.
FYI - the price difference between the R5 and R6 for most people is closer to $1744.86 depending on where you live. I get this from the R5 being $3899 from BH with payboo and the R6 being $2154.14 after tax from Canon (CLP) where I live in CA. So the price for the extra resolution is more like $1700+...Show more →
Thanks. I see no particular reason why birders would use the R5 over the R6 compared to other wlldlife. It will be interesting to see how the R3 will fit into the equation and how many will buy into it.
artsupreme wrote:
As for the difference in the quality of images between the two threads I'm not sure as I don't have time to scroll through them but what I can say is that shooting the R5/R6 side by side they are the same camera with the only difference being resolution (or video specs). So if you see a good image in the R5 thread you know that same image could have been captured with the R6 unless it was heavily cropped. The page you referenced in the R5 thread has a lot of wildlife images and it makes sense that the R5 would be used more often. It appears to me that 90% of this forum seems to be birders, so yeah the R5 would be their camera of choice.
As for me, I rarely need the resolution so I bought two R6's. I have access to an R5 anytime I want but I rarely use it. IMO, unless you really need the R5 resolution, the R6 is the best value on the market at the moment. It's the first all-in-one canon camera for my shooting style that's not intentionally crippled and it's very affordable.
FYI - the price difference between the R5 and R6 for most people is closer to $1744.86 depending on where you live. I get this from the R5 being $3899 from BH with payboo and the R6 being $2154.14 after tax from Canon (CLP) where I live in CA. So the price for the extra resolution is more like $1700+...Show more →
When you also factor in the cost of a CF card as well, the cost difference goes even higher. Would I like to have the extra resolution, absolutely! Do I need it, 95% of the time probably not. Before I purchased, I spent a lot of time going back through my favorite captures to see how I originally framed them, what cropping was needed, and I came to the conclusion that although I had frequently cropped many of my wildlife shots, the best ones did not need a lot of cropping. I also don't do video, so the feature difference on that front was not a factor. Even though I could afford either, I had a really hard time justifying the extra cost. For these reasons, it's why I went with the R6.
I do find I think about composition and cropping a lot more now as I'm shooting vs. before, even though ironically I came from a 7D2, so the the pixel difference of R6 vs. R5 is still in the not so back of my mind at times.
Imagemaster wrote:
Thanks. I see no particular reason why birders would use the R5 over the R6 compared to other wlldlife. It will be interesting to see how the R3 will fit into the equation and how many will buy into it.
I just grabbed my prices from DPR.
Yeah, as for advertised retail pricing the difference is $1400 but the R6 can be had for less straight from Canon (CLP). The R5 does not qualify for the CLP so the difference between what the both cameras can be purchased for today is $1700+
The Canon R6 for $2154.14 is a great value and nearly half of what some people pay for an R5 plus tax.
ct1co2 wrote:
When you also factor in the cost of a CF card as well, the cost difference goes even higher. Would I like to have the extra resolution, absolutely! Do I need it, 95% of the time probably not. Before I purchased, I spent a lot of time going back through my favorite captures to see how I originally framed them, what cropping was needed, and I came to the conclusion that although I had frequently cropped many of my wildlife shots, the best ones did not need a lot of cropping. I also don't do video, so the feature difference on that front was not a factor. Even though I could afford either, I had a really hard time justifying the extra cost. For these reasons, it's why I went with the R6.
I do find I think about composition and cropping a lot more now as I'm shooting vs. before, even though ironically I came from a 7D2, so the the pixel difference of R6 vs. R5 is still in the not so back of my mind at times. ...Show more →
I'm with you on cropping. The only cropping I do is slight horizon adjustments or other minor leveling required for certain shots and the R6 has plenty with MP to spare. IMO, most cropped shots don't look as professional as I like to fill the frame with large apertures to create as much subject isolation as possible.
Very much an amateur and in a stage of life with not a lot of time for shooting. Here's a shot of some apple blossoms, taken in our front yard this spring.
