okafoja
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
WJaekel wrote:
No need for personal attacks with regard to EB-1's comments which for the most part are correct and valid no matter if he "always complains" as claimed . .
For the record, I have used most Canon cameras, too, and currently own the R5, R3 but still the 5D Mark IV, 5DsR, 1Dx III, 1D Mark IV and 7D2, too..
From a pure IQ standpoint, i.e for capturing landscapes and stationary objects @ lower ISOs, the 5DsR definitely still outperforms the R5 for rendering the details. Just recently I was shooting bee- eaters with my EF 600mm II (+1.4x) and EF 200-400mm + 1.4 Ext and clearly can confirm the statement of EB-1 by comparing the results @ 100 % side-by-side, even when downsizing the raws of the 5DsR to the dimensions ot the R5 files. Colors at default also are more pleasing and vivid with the 5DsR, IMO. But that's a matter of personal taste and can be adapted according to one's liking in post processing, of course.
Nevertheless, the output of the R5 overall is excellent and it depends on the individual requirements whether the differences to the 5DsR ultimately matter in practice. But I personally will definitely keep my 5DsR for now, - until I see what the R1 or R5 II brings to the table, at least.
Apart from the areas above, the R5 clearly is superior to the 5DsR (and 5D IV) with regard to all other features and scenarios - particularily for tracking fast moving objects ( i.e. BIF), also for shooting at high ISOs and capturing videos. Especially the subject & animal eye focus of the R5 /R3 in combination with the nearly unlimited AF-focus area of MLCs make a big difference and progress over the DSLRs for tracking though the Animal Eye- AF still is not guaranteed to focus perfectly in all scenarios. That said, longtime DSLR shooters who're considering the switch to ML should be aware of a distinct learning curve to make the best of all the numerous options and settings. Today's mirrorless cameras have largely become pure computers, overloaded with more and more features, functionalities and presets you need to get familar and experienced with in order to avoid confusion and frustration - even if you don't use them all. The possible need of fiddling around with complex settings in the field respectively at an event is not a good idea and easily can distract from the original photographic task and make you miss the motifs, especially for wildlife shots or peak actions in sports. Just my first lesson and experience after the purchase of my R5 three years ago.
As for the recent major experience and use of my cameras on a safari in Tanzania in October 2022 and taking around 16000 images, 70-80% of that output was pretty equally captured with the R5 and R3, the remaining proportion with the 5D Mark IV, 1 Dx III and a small number with the 7 D2. So the R5 and R3 had my clear preference for shooting wildlife and birds because of the reasons mentioned above. For the most part both cams worked very well (with a bit quicker and slightly more reliable Animal Eye-AF of the R3 compared to the R5). I had not taken the 5DsR to Africa because the trip was primarily focused on wildlife and action without much relevance of landscape shots. The 5D Mark IV had again proved to be still an excellent camera and Allrounder, too, that never has let me down though it's not on the same level of the MLs for tracking because it lacks the animal eye focus, of course and offers just limited video capabilities. Nevertheless, I had no major issues with the focus accuracy of the 5D IV once the focus graped the motif. I guess the 6D II which I don't own would have done most of the tasks too. BTW, it's no surprise that the 1Dx III clearly is the best and most advanced camera of the 1-D line and offered excellent results on the safari, too. But it's a heavy brick, of course compared to the lightweight of the R3 and as known has no animal eye focus either.
In summary, the OP's first consideration should be what subjects he primarily wants to shoot and how to use the output. Personally, I'd see no reason to replace the 5DsR with the R5 for pure landscape photography and generally for HQ photos of stationary objects. If VERY large prints or heavy crops are needed, the 5DsR might offer more freedom compared to the 5D IV or 6D II. Regarding that cameras, the use of the files may play a decisive role, too. For social media, websites etc. the 6D II of the OP is more than enough, of course - though certainly not so useful for selfies with its fixed screen ;-) . In any case it' s certainly a good allround camera for shooting weddings, casual motifs, travels and sceneries , including some sports and wildlife. As said, the 5 D IV served me very well in Africa, too, and that presumably would also have been valid for the 6 DII..
However, if the OP primarily is a serious wildlife /bird shooter who also wants to capture landscapes and sceneries etc. at very good quality and/or he is into video recording, the R5 makes perfect sense. The R5 also might be an option if he just wants to keep pace with the technology no matter that his current DSLR gear and photographic results obviously have made him happy up to now and thus basically wouldn't require a switch. In reference to the original post " not to be left behind" looks like the main motif. The R6 II might be a newer and cheaper option for that approach, though
Anyway, I also agree with EB-1, that it's highly recommended to have/keep a second camera body for backups, and potential failures.
The choice might also depend on the investment in lenses. If the OP has an arsenal of EF-lenses he wants to use furthemore, I personally would consider the R5 (or R6 II) but keep the 5DsR. Alternatively, it could be an option to invest in a R5/R6 II combo (or 2R6 II bodies) which also could be the route to go if a complete switch to the RF lens line is intended. I have no experience with the R6 II but it should be a good choice according to the reviews. BTW, I have never experienced a lockup of my R5 since I purchased it 3 years ago.
Wolfgang
wjaekel-foto.de ...Show more →
No personal attack was intended with my statement. Based on my own experience with R5 and numerous Canon cameras, I only disagree with him. As I know now, he's too hard to please. I can appreciate his views but very misleading to new shooters.
|
I have well over 250,000 frames on R5s and am just pointing out some possible issues that may or may not matter to the OP. The R5 is relatively less impressive today than it was in 2020 or 2021. 