p.14 #1 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
Thanks for sharing, Ladziski is an amazing photographer.
I think this release is great for wildlife photographers: 30fps with precapture, less rolling shutter, better autofocus, longer battery life, better viewfinder and video. It is everything I could possibly want in a fullframe camera for wildlife.
Now let’s wait for real test reviews, Gordon Laing mentioned the body gets quite hot shooting stills and with precapture… if that is not a problem in real life experience then we have an absolute winner.
If canon got their act together they could release the same camera in apsc and have the best wildlife camera body ever, i’m sure people will start threads about r7 mkII rumours soon..
The only negative is the price, too steep for me to upgrade now, and above all, canon hasn’t addressed their wildlife lens lineup.
Coming from r5 + 500 f4 II, canon has borrowed some time with this release, but if my prime stopped working now, it would be a hard choice to stay with them.
The Z8 + z400 2.8 with INTEGRATED teleconverter is £16.3k
The r5II + rf400 2.8 + 1.4x is £18.3k which is bonkers. Canon is not Apple neither Profoto, they might be able to justify a UX premium over sony but not over nikon.
p.14 #2 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
cjacques wrote:
Hi Rudy
The only appealing material with the R5 mark ii I have seen so far in terms of wildlife photography is this video with Keith Landzinski, 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
Hi Chantal,
Thanks for this link. What a great promo video for wildlife shooters!! Very hopeful.
p.14 #3 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
+ Stacked sensor
+ Variable shutter fps in ES
+ better AF
+ fast enough readoutspeed for me
+ 8k60 raw
+ button layout about the same as my R5
- No 8k60 in HEVC I didn't expect it but anyway..
- No 4k60p oversampled from 8k ... this I really beleived was there when it can do 8k60.
- No 4k60p oversampled from 5.1k in cropmode! this I don't understand why it isn't available it is on my R5 and I use it alot for wildlife.
- 4k SRAW seems to be lineskipped so not an option.
You end up with only one and that is 8k60 RAW and it is not optimal with such hugh file sizes
p.14 #4 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
Nikon felt so bad for Canon after reading this thread they've announced the Z8 is back to normal price starting Monday to give the R5ii a fighting chance in the market
p.14 #5 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
More likely they realized they're leaving money on the table for a product that retains certain very specific specification advantages over the R5II and that Sony also doesn't have a camera that competes directly at the Z8's regular retail price. If someone was considering switching systems after the R5II announcement, but was on the fence, this is just an added incentive by Nikon to make a decision sooner than later.
As an added bonus, all those Z8 owners looking to bail from the system might now get a little more for their cameras, as it appears there's no shortage of these cameras on the used market.....
p.14 #6 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
Rudy Pohl wrote:
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.
Perhaps Canon is intent on first addressing the broader traditional market of the 5-series, and by some extension, the 1-series. That is, people photography, whether sports or the much more generic realms of portraiture and social events, like weddings, etc, where stills and video work is increasingly blending together.
I'm curious though, as a non-wildlife photographer: in what ways are Canon's current animal detection modes in need of updates? I can imagine there is always room for improvement, but are there specific shortcomings relative to the competition? My recent impression was that some felt the old R5 was still competitive with more recent offerings. Therefore my expectation would be that improvements by Canon that might appear to be people-centric might also be relevant to the various animal and other subject detection modes.
One would expect with a new release that there will be further refinements through firmware updates. We've seen this with Nikon and Sony extending the capabilities of their cameras. Canon does seem to be more conservative with FW updates, so it's difficult to say how much more they will extend capabilities with new features not currently in the camera. But the various animal detection modes already exist and I'd think these certainly would be valid areas for FW updates to refine and improve performance.
p.14 #7 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
biggles2002 wrote:
- No 4k60p oversampled from 5.1k in crop mode! this I don't understand why it isn't available it is on my R5 and I use it alot for
This one omission is a deal breaker for me and a key reason why I'm sticking with my fabulous R5.
I've been a hybrid wildlife shooter for the last 2 years using an R5 + RF100-500 combo. I do 20% stills and 80% video. The 4K60p format in crop mode in the R5 is oversampled from 5.1K and is an essential video format for my work. It significantly extends my effective reach without sacrificing image quality. When reach is not a factor I always use the 4K30p HQ Fine format for excellent image quality.
The R5ii is a no-go for me. As well, there are a few other reasons why a need to pass on this one.
p.14 #8 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
crisdesign wrote:
The Z8 + z400 2.8 with INTEGRATED teleconverter is £16.3k
The r5II + rf400 2.8 + 1.4x is £18.3k which is bonkers.
Z8 + Z400mm f2.8 TC is C$23,598 before taxes
R5 II + RF 400mm f2.8 + 1.4x = C$22,497 (not counting the $500 lens rebate and $300 jacket promo with the R5 II)
So, the Canon combo is not only smaller, lighter, faster, and has better AF, it's also $1,101 cheaper over here. You guys in the UK really get screwed on equipment prices!
p.14 #9 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
molson wrote:
Z8 + Z400mm f2.8 TC is C$23,598 before taxes
R5 II + RF 400mm f2.8 + 1.4x = C$22,497 (not counting the $500 lens rebate and $300 jacket promo with the R5 II)
So, the Canon combo is not only smaller, lighter, faster, and has better AF, it's also $1,101 cheaper over here. You guys in the UK really get screwed on equipment prices!
It's about $16,797 USD, if you buy from BH Photo. No tax if you use their Pay Boo card.
Jim
p.14 #14 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
molson wrote:
Z8 + Z400mm f2.8 TC is C$23,598 before taxes
R5 II + RF 400mm f2.8 + 1.4x = C$22,497 (not counting the $500 lens rebate and $300 jacket promo with the R5 II)
So, the Canon combo is not only smaller, lighter, faster, and has better AF, it's also $1,101 cheaper over here. You guys in the UK really get screwed on equipment prices!
Actually it's the same weight, and size wise the bare RF 400mm is .4" longer than the Z 400. Also I am not sure how you can claim the R5ii + RF 400 is faster when the Mk2 version isn't out. Having owned the R5 + RF 400mm 2.8 + 1.4 TC and Z8 + Z 400mm 2.8TC they both have lighting fast AF (if anything they are indistinguishable in the real world). With that said, odds are the R5ii will have better AF than the Z8.
p.14 #15 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
robert_in_ca wrote:
they both have lighting fast AF (if anything they are indistinguishable in the real world).
When the light levels drop, the Canon cameras are noticeably faster focusing than the Z8, from my experience. That's the primary reason why I sold my Z8 after a few weeks of side-by-side comparison. I'm pretty sure the R5 II won't be worse than the current R5.
p.14 #16 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
I've been enjoying reading everybody's thoughts. It's not surprising to me that the MK II is what people were looking for and not for others. I'm not bothered by the price for the feature set and specs offered at all.
But to chime in with reserved thoughts as I await a production body to arrive. I'm pretty excited and curious to see what this new generation of Stacked Backside Illuminated sensors can do. Even down to hopefully some subtle optical path improvements that might improved using some shorter flange depth, retro focus, adapted lenses.
I do think the R5 pixel size and photosite size are very clever and ideal for motion and stills. This makes it a good place to tinker with more hybrid concepts. Higher resolution would be nice, no doubt, but that creates more headaches when it comes to a few things.
One thing I think that's very lost in the mix and not even mentioned in the general marketing, is the improved low light performance. And it's sounding like both the R5 MK II and R1 are inheriting the triple base ISO of the C400. Unsure how that works out for still and motion on both cameras, but I do have images off a C400, which gives me a hint on the motion side of things. For the R5 series, lower noise in both still and motion certainly would be nice. It's interesting we don't get "open gate", full height motion picture off this new R5. Perhaps that's where a cinema version could make some improvements, or maybe a firmware update. Some will want that for various reasons ranging from anamorphic to framing freedom.
In my experience, with multiple base ISO systems, you sacrifice a smidge of dynamic range for a cleaner image. That can be mitigated a bit with whatever weighting scheme is deployed as well as where those ISO ratings kick in. I'd be curious to see if there's a mode that allows you to lock your ISO to one of those three, but that might be something best left to the system to decide.
New AF stuff is going to be a great addition. In camera AI processing is interesting, though probably something more interesting in post. Though, a firmware update to allow for upscaled RAW would be nice, despite it probably taking significantly longer.
More or less the R5 MK II I think solves some of the quibbles from R5 users. But we'll have to wait and see to get an idea of image quality between the two.
Glass has been a bigger concern for me as of late, particularly on the wide side of things. And yes, I do desire a higher resolution solution at some point. But we'll see how that pans out. I've solved my immediate needs with a different body for the time being.
Not bothered by the "more push" batteries. That sort of solves the in between issues on the R5 and R5c power related limitations. Somewhat bedazzled by the shear number of grips, but I do like they are catering to specific needs on that front.
p.14 #17 · Official Canon EOS R5 Mark II Images & Specifications
burningheart wrote:
Incorrect, as soon as the lens crosses into Canada he would have to pay 12% tax - 7% to British Columbia PST and 5% to Canada GST.
No state tax or VAT collected in the US if you use the Pay Boo card
Jim
