p.13 #1 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
One interesting thing is that I believe I heard there was a card limit of 2TB? I'm wondering if this is due to their current cataloging system that slows down the camera as the amount of data increases on the card. I have been using 2TB cards for a long time in the R5's and the wake up/start up time slows quite a bit when you start getting 1TB+ of data on the card.
p.13 #2 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
docusync wrote:
Really? So according to your logic Canon should start selling a better just-released camera cheaper than the competitor selling their inferior 1 year old camera now? Is it some kind of race to zero? You lost me here buddy.
Now you are talking sense again since you are comparing r5ii with current competition, z8, at current prices. If Canon r5ii is better than the z8 enough to worth the price premium of 800usd, sure the Canon pricing works. I never said Canon pricing is wrong, I think it might make sense actually, I just thought YOU are wrong to compare LAUNCH prices of two camera released in two different years….
p.13 #3 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
Hairy Heron wrote:
Does anyone know if the R5 II can take advantage of CFx 4.0 card speed? To be clear I'm not talking about base compatibility since I know 4.0 is backwards compatible, but can actually write to the card near the card's advertised read speed.
See below - screenshot - no to cfx4. But yes it should still work at slow speed.
- testing I have seen suggests 80 frames before buffer which is consistent with old delkin black cfx2. Specs say 89 frames. See link below.
- it does much better at craw (200) and less than 30fps
- given the lack of impressive buffer, the throughput is limited by camera [and the v2 cfexpress]
So don't go buying the expensive v4 cards for the R5II expecting them to make a difference.
I recently tested my r5 and did not get any gain in performance between Delkin Power (800 write sustained) and Delkin Black (1400 write sustained). I expect that this has improved a tiny bit to match the 30fps vs 20fps but not enough to make use of the better sustained write cards.
see about 9.2 mins in &t=601s
From https://www.canon-europe.com/cameras/eos-r5-mark-ii/specifications/
p.13 #4 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
Hairy Heron wrote:
Does anyone know if the R5 II can take advantage of CFx 4.0 card speed? To be clear I'm not talking about base compatibility since I know 4.0 is backwards compatible, but can actually write to the card near the card's advertised read speed.
Practically speaking it doesn't matter because all cameras today are limited by their imaging ASIC speed. In other words, the buffer clearing rate is a function of how fast the ASIC can process a raw sensor frame and turn it into a raw/jpg file ready for writing. Taking the R5 II's 30 fps spec, that would be 1362 MB/s (30 fps x 45.4 average raw file size).
p.13 #5 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
wind30 wrote:
Now you are talking sense again since you are comparing r5ii with current competition, z8, at current prices. If Canon r5ii is better than the z8 enough to worth the price premium of 800usd, sure the Canon pricing works. I never said Canon pricing is wrong, I think it might make sense actually, I just thought YOU are wrong to compare LAUNCH prices of two camera released in two different years….
p.13 #6 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
snapsy wrote:
Practically speaking it doesn't matter because all cameras today are limited by their imaging ASIC speed. In other words, the buffer clearing rate is a function of how fast the ASIC can process a raw sensor frame and turn it into a raw/jpg file ready for writing. Taking the R5 II's 30 fps spec, that would be 1362 MB/s (30 fps x 45.4 average raw file size).
The R5 tops out at approximately 500MByte/s for writing to its CFe card, regardless of the card used. So if the R5II can handle the advertised-by-the-cards 1700Mbyte/s write speed, it would be more than 3 times faster than its predecessor.
I'll likely get CFe 4 cards since the price difference isn't that much, mostly to make offloading to my computer faster. With 30fps at 45MP, I'll likely take a lot of shots per session
p.13 #7 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
koenkooi wrote:
The R5 tops out at approximately 500MByte/s for writing to its CFe card, regardless of the card used. So if the R5II can handle the advertised-by-the-cards 1700Mbyte/s write speed, it would be more than 3 times faster than its predecessor.
I'll likely get CFe 4 cards since the price difference isn't that much, mostly to make offloading to my computer faster. With 30fps at 45MP, I'll likely take a lot of shots per session
Right, and the 500 MB/s limit should be the clue that it's not the cards or the CFE spec version implemented on the camera that's causing that limit, meaning adding CFE 4.0 support by itself would do nothing to improve write speeds.
p.13 #8 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
Andrew Reid over at EOSHD said the R5 II has an internal fan. Really? I don't see anything in the previews. He seems very negative and I think there might be false information in his rant.
p.13 #9 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
lsquare wrote:
Andrew Reid over at EOSHD said the R5 II has an internal fan. Really? I don't see anything in the previews. He seems very negative and I think there might be false information in his rant.
He is so against Canon and he just like to write against any new releases. He just like to randomly rant about anything.
R5 II does not have a fan, the cooling grip has a fan and use the body vents to canalize the air flow.
Thanks for admitting your mistake. Honestly a lot of arguments here are subjective , like is r5ii too expensive? I don’t really join those because it just ends up nowhere…. Sometimes however when someone say something totally illogical, like comparing launch prices of cameras launched at way different times , I just point it out so people can have the right comparison numbers.
p.13 #12 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
wind30 wrote:
Thanks for admitting your mistake. Honestly a lot of arguments here are subjective , like is r5ii too expensive? I don’t really join those because it just ends up nowhere…. Sometimes however when someone say something totally illogical, like comparing launch prices of cameras launched at way different times , I just point it out so people can have the right comparison numbers.
I’m not sure how you came to this conclusion. Was it the “yeah, right, winky face”? The only thing I admitted by posted that picture that you need to chill. Can we agree to disagree? Unlike you, I couldn’t care less if you’re right or wrong, I don’t want to force my opinion on you and continue this pointless conversation. You’re free to believe the Earth is flat, the Moon is made out of cheese and Canon doesn’t need to make profit as businesses. Are we cool now?
p.13 #13 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
arbitrage wrote:
I don't know....probably in the fall sometime. I may just borrow my friend's R5II (as she plans to preorder and get it day one) instead. If I get the Bezos loaner I'd have to get a 100-500 lens also. Or I may renew my CPS Platinum and get the R5II with a better lens like RF600 as I did when I tested the R3 from CPS.
Hi Geoff, I did not see your review of the R3 with the RF600 can you point me in the right direction. thanks
p.13 #14 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
cjacques wrote:
Hi Geoff, I did not see your review of the R3 with the RF600 can you point me in the right direction. thanks
I don't think I did any big write up about it. I've just mentioned my thoughts from time to time in different threads.
It was back around April 2022 so it has been awhile. I mostly shot swallows at Swan Lake, ducks at EL and Kestrels at Mill Hill. I liked it better than the R5 in every way EXCEPT for the lack of MPs I've been used to for so long now. (Same issue I had with the A9III). I loved the size, shape and weight of the body. Perfect body for an integrated grip camera.
If you have any specific questions about it let me know and I'll try to remember
p.13 #15 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
arbitrage wrote:
I don't think I did any big write up about it. I've just mentioned my thoughts from time to time in different threads.
It was back around April 2022 so it has been awhile. I mostly shot swallows at Swan Lake, ducks at EL and Kestrels at Mill Hill. I liked it better than the R5 in every way EXCEPT for the lack of MPs I've been used to for so long now. (Same issue I had with the A9III). I loved the size, shape and weight of the body. Perfect body for an integrated grip camera.
If you have any specific questions about it let me know and I'll try to remember...Show more →
OK Thanks. I also tested drive that combo. It was not so much because I was interested in the R3 but because I was wondering if it was time to cave in and trade my 600 F4 mark ii for an RF version. In the end, I was more impressed with the added performance that the R3 provided over the one provided by the RF 600. I used the R3 on my other prime lenses (300 F2.8 mark ii, 400 F4 Do makr ii with 1.4x and 2 x) and was happily surprised how good it was. Nothing scientific but I concluded that whatever I was gaining from that combo was more attributable to the R3 than the RF 600 (if you ignore the weight advantage). I have shoot a lot of +Canon +/- 20 MP cameras without ever thinking I was missing anything. However once you touched a 45 mp camera it is hard to go back. Long story short, I did not get the RF 600 or the R3. So I have a lot of money in my piggiy bank I just caved in and ordered the R5 mark ii. Keeping my fingers crossed that Canon will soon release some light weight wildlife lenses with F2.8 or F4/5.6 aperture before I am too old to hold these ones too Let me know if I can be of any assistance when you want to do those test drive, Who knows, perhaps by then, the purchase of the RF 600 will also have made a dent in my piggy bank. Time is running out for me and as they say, you can't take it with you.
p.13 #16 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
docusync wrote:
I’m not sure how you came to this conclusion. Was it the “yeah, right, winky face”? The only thing I admitted by posted that picture that you need to chill. Can we agree to disagree? Unlike you, I couldn’t care less if you’re right or wrong, I don’t want to force my opinion on you and continue this pointless conversation. You’re free to believe the Earth is flat, the Moon is made out of cheese and Canon doesn’t need to make profit as businesses. Are we cool now?
Yes actually, I now see it is pointless discussing with u…. But I hope other people knows the right price numbers for comparison,
p.13 #19 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
This new video by Jared Polin, who was invited by Canon to try out the R1 and R5ii, is really worth a watch.
He says "In my opinion the auto focus systems here are far superior to that of its competitors."
Right now it's being used and demoed for some sports, but I'm hoping that Canon will have a wildlife version of this like Nikon has the Bird AF feature.
Personally, I'm really surprised and disappointed that wildlife photography and videography were not even mentioned let along featured in any the promo material or videos, unless I missed it. How can a major brand release two new cameras and not even mention the wildlife genre? Seems odd to me.
.
p.13 #20 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
Rudy Pohl wrote:
This new video by Jared Polin, who was invited by Canon to try out the R1 and R5ii, is really worth a watch.
He says "In my opinion the auto focus systems here are far superior to that of its competitors."
Right now it's being used and demoed for some sports, but I'm hoping that Canon will have a wildlife version of this like Nikon has the Bird AF feature.
Personally, I'm really surprised and disappointed that wildlife photography and videography were not even mentioned let along featured in any the promo material or videos, unless I missed it. How can a major brand release two new cameras and not even mention the wildlife genre? Seems odd to me.
.
The only appealing material with the R5 mark ii I have seen so far in terms of wildlife photography is this video with Keith Ladzinski, a Canon Explorer of light. I know this is mostly marketing but nonethless I would not mind having some of these images in my portfolio
