Someone asked me... "Hey, why are you so bummed about what appears to be a great camera"?
I stopped and really thought about it. Honestly, it looks beautiful, seems to have the best AF in the industry, and will no doubt be a solid and reliable camera. Why do I feel the way I do...
Then it hit me. If I were to ask you 4 years ago "What do you think will be the spec list of the R1", but added the simple provision that you tell me the most conservative version of it. And bang... 4 years later that spec list has come true. I can't see why anyone should be terribly ecstatic. Its ok to like it, but I can't see this being something to talk about. They literally gave us the most conservative spec list anyone could have imagined 4 years ago... to a tee. Ok, Ok, Ok, I wouldn't have imagined they would have tried to distract us with their version of Gigapixel enlargement in-camera, but just about everything else on that list would have been covered in some way or another.
How about you... Am I alone in thinking I could have hit this one on the head, 100 over 100, by simply thinking super conservative?
Simple - I can't afford two systems. I have to sell one to buy the other. Again, birding guide, not I-banker!
docusync wrote:
The OP - why wouldn't you just get whatever camera(s) / lens(es) suit you best in addition to what you have? It's not a marriage and you're legally allowed to have multiple cameras from different manufacturers. If I was primarily interested in birds, I'd definitely have a Canon camera + the 100-500 and 200-800 and a Nikon camera + the 600TC. Maybe even a Sony camera for the 200-600 and #1 AF (which could be dethroned by the new Canons - TBD). I can also assure you the Canon CEO won't feel personally attacked if you buy a Nikon or Sony system
All brands offer certain unique features that others do not have. It's also a cat and mouse game. If something is missing from your system today - it may well show up tomorrow, right after you sell your gear for peanuts....Show more →
artsupreme wrote:
Imagine having a built in flickable TC in your RF 600, it only makes it much better. Of course you'll have to pay for this feature, but man it's like having two big whites in one.
I'm happy with the RF 600 as is. If Canon does come out with a 600 TC it will certainly jack up the price significantly. I personally don't mind taking a tc on and off and it certainly isn't worth $4k to me. I could be interested in the 1.4x/2x converter that has been rumored if it matched the optical quality of the current RF extenders. Switching between the 1.4x and 2x can be a minor hassle when you have to fiddle around with 2 sets of caps.
R Royse wrote:
I'm happy with the RF 600 as is. If Canon does come out with a 600 TC it will certainly jack up the price significantly. I personally don't mind taking a tc on and off and it certainly isn't worth $4k to me. I could be interested in the 1.4x/2x converter that has been rumored if it matched the optical quality of the current RF extenders. Switching between the 1.4x and 2x can be a minor hassle when you have to fiddle around with 2 sets of caps.
It's been interesting to read your thoughtful responses, so thanks for those. A switch isn't a foregone conclusion, but it's reassuring to see that some on this board feel similarly about Canon's current line-up as it pertains to bird photography. It's also worth nothing that birding and bird photography are my brand and my business, so there's a professional stake in this. The more and better photos I capture, the more people I will entice to come on tours with me. A difference that's minor to some will compound as I move between the US, Canada, Brazil, Namibia, Botswana, South Africa, India, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Thailand in the next seven months, and I owe it to myself to have the best possible kit to practice my craft.
Any while I haven't shot every lens and body from every brand, I have a lot of close, exceptionally talented photo friends with way more money than me who have had those opportunities. And the message from them is fairly universal; there are better options out there, and I would be able to exploit them given my current skillset.
I just want to see Canon's RF600II lens. I will not upgrade to the RF600 just for weight savings since it's based off the older EF lens.
I don't plan to move from Canon as I am invested in their lenses. I only have 2 RF lenses (100-500 and 400 2.8) but many more EF lenses. There really are no other lenses I need but want a newer 600 but not the current RF600. I work with what I have. I'm good and not looking at the grass on the other side at this time.
I feel ya, you have a very sharp 500 I lens. I had that lens before going to the II version. I was fixing to do the same and still may. But, I think I will try the R5Ii first. I am shooting with the 7DII. So, I have not been satisfied with Canon for years. But, I want to try a mirrorless before switching. I'm a tightwad and want to explore all the options before I switch. If the R5II had not hit with fair specs. I would be selling off all my gear pretty soon. But, now will wait a few months longer.
Nice photos by the way. I am in South America shooting now. Allot of the same birds.
The best birding setup right now is Nikon z8 + 800 6.3 - if you like the Nikon Z8 ergonomics. The setup is cheaper than super tele RF lenses used. Anyone focused on just birding, should seriously consider it. Plus the Nikon 400mm w/ TC is indelible for mammals.
I can afford to switch, but haven’t considered it. My primary subjects are bears, and then birds oppertunisiticly.
Why?
2xR5s work incredibly well even by today’s standards. The AF & ISO of R5II look very promising. If the rumored 1x-2x extender becomes real, all of a sudden, 100-300mm F2.8 lens would become worth its value in gold for me me for travel photography. Similarly 200-500mm F4 that has been rumored, looks very intriguing for wildlife work.
No system is perfect. They all take the lead at one point on another. But, the gear is plenty good for all systems where it is not a limiting factor for me. Switching is simply a hassle, its just a tool end of the day.
Right. I want to see a proper/redesigned 600 that is engineered specifically for mirrorless, not the hybrid cop-out they’re currently offering us. If I knew that lens - or even a new 500 - was coming through the pipeline in the near future, then my thinking would change. Sadly, there’s nothing to suggest we’ll get anything so inspiring from Canon in the next few years. And that hypothetical upgrade already exists in the other brands.
Methodical wrote:
I just want to see Canon's RF600II lens. I will not upgrade to the RF600 just for weight savings since it's based off the older EF lens.
I don't plan to move from Canon as I am invested in their lenses. I only have 2 RF lenses (100-500 and 400 2.8) but many more EF lenses. There really are no other lenses I need but want a newer 600 but not the current RF600. I work with what I have. I'm good and not looking at the grass on the other side at this time.
Canon has 200-500 in pipeline. They have delayed it to H2 of this year because of having difficulty fulfilling the demand of 100-300. After all, it’s an Olympics year. Plus a 1x-2x is probable based on reliable individuals I know.
dorian wrote:
Right. I want to see a proper/redesigned 600 that is engineered specifically for mirrorless, not the hybrid cop-out they’re currently offering us. If I knew that lens - or even a new 500 - was coming through the pipeline in the near future, then my thinking would change. Sadly, there’s nothing to suggest we’ll get anything so inspiring from Canon in the next few years. And that hypothetical upgrade already exists in the other brands.
dorian wrote:
It's been interesting to read your thoughtful responses, so thanks for those. A switch isn't a foregone conclusion, but it's reassuring to see that some on this board feel similarly about Canon's current line-up as it pertains to bird photography. It's also worth nothing that birding and bird photography are my brand and my business, so there's a professional stake in this. The more and better photos I capture, the more people I will entice to come on tours with me. A difference that's minor to some will compound as I move between the US, Canada, Brazil, Namibia, Botswana, South Africa, India, Vietnam, Cambodia, and Thailand in the next seven months, and I owe it to myself to have the best possible kit to practice my craft.
Any while I haven't shot every lens and body from every brand, I have a lot of close, exceptionally talented photo friends with way more money than me who have had those opportunities. And the message from them is fairly universal; there are better options out there, and I would be able to exploit them given my current skillset. ...Show more →
Sounds like your bread and butter currently is the Canon R5 + 600mm f/4 IS II lens. You asked for perspectives. Personally I'd say wait and if you aren't already a CPS Platinum member join and borrow the R5 II, RF800/5.6 & RF600/4 first. See what you think. That's a low cost option which will be very useful for your decision thought process.
Switching systems is a huge money sink and that doesn't appear to be the best use of your money right now. I understand this is for business - but you need cash to build a business and money will eventually start flowing. For now make sure you aren't happy with the R5 II and RF800/5.6 or RF600/4.
Don't sell Canon short. They are working overtime to fill up their RF line-up since COVID. It's slow. But they will eventually launch a RF DO supertelephoto that will knock it out of the park like the old EF 400 DO II. They will launch a built in teleconverter RF supertelephoto lens like the EF 200-400. They will offer a higher end high MP body. It's just a matter of time. You only have to look at their endless stream of patents as evidence that they are cooking up men-in-black-level bodies and lenses.
Having done a lot of GAS tourism I can confirm that each system has elements that surpass all others. That goes without saying. It is fun to discover new gems that aren't in your existing systems. But this comes at a huge cost. Can you really afford that right now?
Over the long run glass is much more important than the latest body tech. So if you do make the leap make sure they have a better collection of lenses than what you could assemble right now with Canon.
arbitrage wrote:
Why are people so underwhelmed by the R5II? What else did people expect it to have?
Lets see, considering the A1 and Z9 are considerably more expensive yet the Z8 is currently $800 less...
It has 45MP Stacked sensor @30FPS, full 14 bit RAW....Z8/Z9 have 45 @20FPS....A1 has 50 @30FPS (only in lossy compressed RAW)
It has RAW precapture at 0.5s, Z8/Z9 only have useless jpeg precapture, A1...no precapture what so ever
It has the nicest EVF in the business for pure image quality just looking through it...Z8/Z9 is low res and terrible to evaluate exposure, A1 is higher res but not as nice of an image as the original R5 EVF.
Remains to be seen but my gut says it will still have the most jarring transition from actually firing to not firing of the three because even the R3 wasn't great with the stacked sensor...but it should be good enough now that it does have a stacked sensor.
It does have a slower readout than the Nikon/Sony...same as the A9/A9II which I found to be fast enough for birds. Probably not for everything though.
The R5's BEAF when used on non-BIF is the best in the business already so R5II will either improve or stay the same.
The R5's buttons and button customization is top notch, not as good as the A1 but way better than the Z8/Z9
I don't know...it seems to tick most of the boxes for a high-res, stacked sensor bird camera. If I was an R5 owner with a good investment in Canon lenses that I liked then I think the R5II would have given me what I would have wanted.
Sort of like the A1II....all I really want is more FPS and RAW precapture plus some QOL improvements from the A9III/A7RV generation. ...Show more →
I think op main beef is r5ii did not get Canon flagship af which is a departure from what everyone else is doing, both Sony and Nikon trickle down their flagship af to even very cheap camera.
Jazzgear296 wrote:
I’m sort of in your camp. I left Canon years ago and moved to Sony, then came back when Canon entered the mirrorless world….while keeping my Sony gear. I;ve unfortunately amassed quite a bit of RF glass and not looking to take a bath on resale. So, I am going to keep what I have with the R5. But I have no plans to upgrade any further, and will use what I have until the R5 body dies, then I may sell off my RF lenses — depending on where Canon is at against the competition at that time.
I also shoot both Canon and Sony and I think I will keep my R5 for now but reduce my glass. Currently own RF L lenses from 50/1.2 to 135/1.8 primes and the f/2.8 holy trinity and the 100-500mm. So need to decide if I will keep a portrait kit wit the 50/1.2, 85/1.2, and 235/1.8 or just the holy trinity for general shooting. Everything else I should sell and buy either into a Nikon based wildlife birding system based on the Z8 or buy a FE 600mm GM and see where that takes me.
arbitrage wrote:
Nikon surely has the best lens with the 600TC and some nice portable options in the 600PF and 400/4.5. I would get your hands on a Z8 or Z9 before switching to make sure you can get on with that camera. To me it has lacking custom buttons and custom button options, an EVF that is very hard to expose accurately and AF that I find behind Sony and Canon. Z8/Z9 do have some things over the others like the smoothest EVF when actually firing but really that is it for bird photography. Nikon is all about the lenses. Sony is all about the cameras....Show more →
Could you please elaborate on this supposed Nikon EVF exposure issue?
Nikon bodies have 2 modes, one that shows the scene as an OVF, one that simulates the result you are going to get. Both being of course also supported by an histogram.
I have never had any issues exposing correctly not getting a realistic impression of how images will be exposed. Despite the fact that the EVF of the Nikons is able to reach much higher brightness levels compared to Sony and Canon. Which is brilliant when shooting at noon or in snowy conditions.
I use the Sony a9III and GFX-100II also and clearly prefer overall the EVF of the Z8/Z9 even though they are lower res. To me it’s the best EVF on the market (I haven’t tested the new Canons). So I am a bit surprised to see it listed as a weak point.
As far as bird AF goes, at least Steve Perry seems to think that as of fm5,0 the Z9 is the best there is. But of course he is focusing on situations that result in actual quality bird photography. Which a tiny bird over a busy background clearly isn’t. I feel it’s important to focus on relevant benchmarks. Most of the YouTube video comparisons show situations in which there would be zero keepers. I wouldn’t want Nikon to focus resources and ai algo training bandwidth on photos with zero photographic value. And I think that birding represents perhaps 0.5% of photography although in this forum you’d think that it’s the only domain that matters.
Anyways, they are rumored to come up with another significant AF update in the coming weeks. The progress has been impressive so far and their new free direct upload cloud service will give them access to a much larger set of images for ai training. This sounds like a brilliant strategy to me.
Finally, I believe that Nikon is just getting started on long lenses. I expect them to come up with a series of zoom super télés, probably with built-in TCs, that should further extend the value for wildlife shooters.
As nature photographer who primarily does wildlife and some birds, I have to agree I'm disappointed. The R52 looks to be a nice upgrade and I will get that for one of my cameras. However I really wanted a camera that has everything - a larger sensor - i.e. 45 MP, pre-buffer, a large buffer, cross point focus, rugged build for shooting all kinds of conditions. With the R1 addition, canon will have 11 mirrorless cameras on the market (https://www.usa.canon.com/cameras/eos-r-system), but not one camera has all of those things. I would love to see a 45MP R1s, but that doesn't look likely. I was planning to upgrade my other camera to an R1 but after seeing the specs am not sure. I am now considering waiting to see what the next Z9/A1 bring to the table. I could in theory switch one camera to Nikon or Sony and buy one long lens to make it my primary wildlife camera and then use the R52 with my current lenses for my shorter focal length wildlife and as my landscape camera. I do agree that Nikon is pretty tempting with their wildlife lenses. I get really jealous when I have to put on a TC in the field in sometimes dusty conditions while my friend just goes click and doesn't miss any action.
bernardl wrote:
Could you please elaborate on this supposed Nikon EVF exposure issue?
Nikon bodies have 2 modes, one that shows the scene as an OVF, one that simulates the result you are going to get. Both being of course also supported by an histogram.
I have never had any issues exposing correctly not getting a realistic impression of how images will be exposed. Despite the fact that the EVF of the Nikons is able to reach much higher brightness levels compared to Sony and Canon. Which is brilliant when shooting at noon or in snowy conditions.
I use the Sony a9III and GFX-100II also and clearly prefer overall the EVF of the Z8/Z9 even though they are lower res. To me it’s the best EVF on the market (I haven’t tested the new Canons). So I am a bit surprised to see it listed as a weak point.
As far as bird AF goes, at least Steve Perry seems to think that as of fm5,0 the Z9 is the best there is. But of course he is focusing on situations that result in actual quality bird photography. Which a tiny bird over a busy background clearly isn’t. I feel it’s important to focus on relevant benchmarks. Most of the YouTube video comparisons show situations in which there would be zero keepers. I wouldn’t want Nikon to focus resources and ai algo training bandwidth on photos with zero photographic value. And I think that birding represents perhaps 0.5% of photography although in this forum you’d think that it’s the only domain that matters.
Anyways, they are rumored to come up with another significant AF update in the coming weeks. The progress has been impressive so far and their new free direct upload cloud service will give them access to a much larger set of images for ai training. This sounds like a brilliant strategy to me.
Finally, I believe that Nikon is just getting started on long lenses. I expect them to come up with a series of zoom super télés, probably with built-in TCs, that should further extend the value for wildlife shooters.
The Z8/Z9 EVF is just poor at showing a proper representation of the brightness level for an image. In perfect light it is decent but in cloudy light it is not. And yes I am using the WYSIWYG mode (Can't remember what Nikon calls that setting). And yes I do have the histogram up but that is useless for seeing when the first bright spots are overexposing...only useful if you have a large area of white.
No one else complains about the EVF, but to me it was the biggest deal breaker every time I used that camera.
The Canon and Sony AF are better for what I shoot. Can I get the shots with all 3 brands...yes. Is it easier with Sony...yes. If the Nikon is good for you or Steve Perry then all is well. Who cares what I think. I just advise Dorion to try the other cameras first as he may not like either Sony or Nikon as they are all such different systems.
I agree, shooting a small bird against some background would be a waste of any of these high-end expensive cameras. I've never tried to do so, nor do I intend to. The fact that you made that statement tells me you may just not be experienced enough in that genre of photography to understand why it is beneficial to be able to acquire a bird further away and not have to wait till it fills 25% of the frame. I thought it was pretty obvious, but I guess not. I've explained it countless times on this and BCG forums as to why it is beneficial.
The Nikon lenses are drool worthy....that is why I've bought the Z9 twice and had the Z8 on loan once because I wanted to switch just for the lenses. But the camera is just too much of a step back for what I shoot. When Z9II arrives I'll try again.
artsupreme wrote:
Imagine having a built in flickable TC in your RF 600, it only makes it much better. Of course you'll have to pay for this feature, but man it's like having two big whites in one.
