I have been using R6 for the past 2 years and have been very happy with it. I primarily shoot birds and wildlife and have a 100-500 and EF600f4 to meet my needs. I am thinking of upgrading from R6 to either a on sale/refurbished R5 or R6Mark II. With current R6 I have always had some limitations on pixels when I doing heavy crop for smaller or far away birds and also video has been a limitation for any 4K slow motion . However I really like the upgraded R6mark ii AF and the pre capture feature. The price point is also a plus for R6mark ii. Any thoughts or suggestion la what to look for and recommendations on better upgrade at this time ? R5 mark ii is out of reach so not even considering that 😄😄
The original R5 is still a great camera, and personally I would rather have the extra MPs of the R5 over the newer AF aglos of the R6 Mk II. Ideally you can find one still under warranty for under $2,000 at this point.
When I switched from the A7RIII I went back and forth on a used R5 or new R6II and went with the R6II but now wish I had gone with the R5 for the extra resolution.
The rolling shutter (bird wing motion is fast; fast panning) is about the same r5 vs r6ii, so that isn't a consideration b/t the two vs stacked sensor cameras. With those two lenses I wouldn't consider switching to another brand. R7 maybe? But there are tradeoffs there, but 32mb and more reach. Maybe some compromise with AF and more noise.
I have an R6 and am generally happy with it for general photography. There are sometimes good deals on the Canon website for refurbished R6 II units but I've decided to wait for the R6 III, hoping that pre-capture on the model is improved and updated. Same goes for my Sony A7IV-waiting for version V.
I had the R5 alongside my R6II and really liked the resolution of the R5. While the AF on the R5/R6 is excellent, the AF on the R6II employs the bulk of the system and algorithms from the R3 and is faster and stickier than the R5/R6, and offers more choices for subject detection. Also, the sensor readout speed is slightly faster than the R5/R6 so rolling shutter is improved. If I had to pick between the two, I'd probably pick the R6II because it's such a supremely capable and well-executed camera, but the resolution of the R5 is addictive and it's an excellent camera overall as well. For me, the solution has been the R5II because it's the best of both and a whole lot more, and trying to choose between the R5 and R6II was very difficult. I know that the OP said that the R5II is not an option, so I'd recommend the R6II if the AF improvements are important. In addition to its superb AF, it's a great low-light camera, even better than my R5II, in my experience. If the resolution is more important, the R5 is the best choice because in addition to the 45 megapixels, it's still got an excellent AF system and great performance, but the 24 megapixels of the R6II are much more than enough for most photographic situations unless you crop heavily a lot.
I’ve got an R6 and am considering the R5 and R6ii as well. I do mainly sports and some portraits and crop images at times. Does anyone have any crop comparisons between the R5 and R6/6ii?
No crops but IMO, for sports to really benefit from the extra resolution of 45MP over 24MP it will be at lower ISOs and high shutter speeds to minimize any 'micro blur' effects caused by either camera or subject motion. I'll admit I have not exhaustively tested the differences between the two but from my trial of the R5 for sports-centric applications, I didn't feel it made a significant difference (compared to 24MP) for the bulk of my sports shooting, which is often at higher ISOs either in poor weather, at night, or indoors.
That said, at lower ISOs and/or under strobes, 45MP will resolve more fine details.
There are other R5 vs. R6 vs. R6II differences to consider. I prefer the R6II over the R6 because of the additional AF options and better subject/face/eye tracking. But also because the R6II's newer processor results in a less laggy EVF experience in fast-action situations, particularly that it more smoothly transitions the EVF feed from between image capture and viewing. Battery life is also better with the R6II. R5 has a better EVF that is brighter in high brightness conditions. The R6/R6II on the other hand block up shadow details and more quickly give the appearance of silhouetted subjects in high contrast and/or strong backlight, even though the shadow detail exists and is visible when reviewing images in the EVF.
I went from an R6 to an R5. Like Rsheffler, I have not really seen much advantage from the higher resolution (mostly sports shooting). For birds it may be different, but the keeper rate on the R5 is a little less than the R6, possibly because of the ability to resolve more motion blur and atmopsheric effects. These are still very high keeper rates, but I do notice a difference. Cropping things far away has not turned out to be fruitful as often as I thought. But cropping a closer thing that is small in the frame anyway may work. Also on ISO the noise is much more noticeable on the R5. I would use my R6 at 25600 and get acceptable images after denoising. The R5 is at least a stop below that, which makes a difference in twilight especially if you don't have the 2.8 primes (I do not).
For portraits, I also dont really see an advantage. At any kind of normal viewing size you really can't see much difference. Remember that while it seems like 2x the resolution, that is total area. The linear resolution is about 1.4x if I remember right. So a 40% increase (rough numbers). I have found for landscapes the extra res makes a notable difference. Also for some macro work with fine textures.
The big jump for me for sports and action was to an R3. Still 24mp but much cleaner files. Better battery life, better AF, GPS, more buttons to program. Most comfortable body every, for me anyway. I love this thing. Used they are not much more than an R5 right now.
p.1 #10 · Canon R5 vs R6 Mark II - upgrade from R6
I made the switch from R6II to the R5 and so far I am very happy. Here are two quick shots using EF100mm IS and quick process through Picasa. I don't like spending a lot of time processing, but his is the difference when you crop from the last picture shot with both cameras.
