Here are my R5 vs Sony thoughts I jotted down after using the camera for 7 hrs yesterday. We did not have a lot of good subjects to really test everything but it is what it is. I'll get to play with it again in the future and hopefully try it on some other subjects. If you have questions I can try to answer them but this is very limited experience with the R5 so far.
AED is remarkable. I couldn’t believe how far away it would narrow down to a head square. I used it both in Auto and User Selected point. I wish I could have both of those options on a different back button but you can use C modes to switch quickly via the M-Fn C-mode toggle option.
The Sony RTT surely competes but the R5’s AED makes things even easier. I could literally look away from my flipped out LCD and check my email and trust the Auto AED to be tracking the birds head while I was shooting a Yellowlegs foraging, spinning in the water, head in and out. I think out of 200 shots maybe 4 had a slight focus shift. I’ve looked away from my Sony’s LCD also and you can sort of trust it but the RTT can drift and it then won’t recover. The AED is always making adjustments (some not good…see next) but it will get back on the head without any input or AF-ON pumping. The AED did show times off odd behaviour, jumping around too much when backgrounds got really close (like a rocky shore with specular highlights) and sometimes couldn’t “see” the tiny sandpipers at first. But that was in Auto…switch over to USSP and “bam” there it goes onto the head.
Where the R5 falls behind the A9 is when tracking BIF against complicated backgrounds. I saw this in a few different scenarios. First time I was tracking a mallard that flew against a row of houses. The AED kept pumping back onto the houses (dancing squares) and then back to the birds. When the birds got against sky it then nailed them. Another time I had an Oystercatcher take off from the ground over specular highlight rocky low-tide shore. The AED couldn’t see it with all the distractions, it came up high enough to be against sky and the AED grabbed it, a second later it came down lower and as soon as the background got complicated the AED lost it again. This is the biggest difference I found vs A9 RTT. With A9 RTT it does sometimes have difficulty picking it up against a background as the R5 AED did at first but if the A9 RTT gets the lock against the sky it will never let it go against a background. I’ve always said the A9’s stickiness is its greatest strength and one of its biggest weaknesses as if it gets what you want you have nailed the shot…but if it grabs something else you might as well put the camera down till the next flight pass. The R5 makes more decisions and jumps back and forth which means it will lose a subject as background changes. The R5 AED tracking doesn’t get distracted by the bird passing behind sticks and things (nor does the A9) so in that case both are excellent.
Ergonomics:
I had thought the R5 would be a much better camera to hold than the Sony. It isn’t any better. The grip size in the hand is essentially equal. The buttons on the A9II/A7RIV are better. The R5’s are like an A9/A7RIII/A7III…small and hard to tell if you are hitting the correct one and which one you are hitting (especially between * and focus option buttons). The feel of the wheels I found sort of similar or close enough I didn’t care one way or the other. The two ways the R5 grip is better than Sony A9II is there is more space between fingers and lenses and my pinky can just fit on the grip without the BG on. With the A9II my pinky is about 1/2 on and on the A9 it is only a sliver on. I would always use a BG on either camera and my fingers are skinny so I’ve never found an issue with tight space between Sony lenses. So for me the A9II wins for ergonomics but it won’t for everyone.
R5 Pros:
* AED which makes shooting everything other than the most challenging BIF easier, almost brain dead easy….
* Top LCD
* More space between grip/lens
* Longer grip to support pinky
* Three wheels where I can have ISO on top rear wheel without pushing a button every time I turn on the camera for My Dial
* MS sound
* MS frame insertion at 12FPS
* Faster card writing speeds with no issues as it writes even with the USH-II SD card (CFe is of course faster still but I was surprised that it didn’t seem a lot faster…you still could watch the red light for a few seconds after just a 30 shot burst with CFe)
R5 Cons:
* Can’t have AED USSP and Auto recognized and therefore assigned to two different buttons (need to utilize C modes or my Menu)
* Can’t have ES/MS toggle assigned to a button (need to use C modes or My Menu)
* Gets confused with complicated backgrounds while tracking and shooting
* Can’t get AED out of Zone or any other AF mode (I had thought you could out of Zone but I guess only Human Head Face detect works as it never activated on the birds?). Eye-Detect is greyed out once in Zone AF but Human/Animal is still selected so I thought it would still see the bird as a subject or the head but it doesn’t.
* Batteries drain in parallel meaning you always have to charge two no matter how short your session.
* Leaning vertical lines in the background in ES and an always present risk of wing distortion in ES.
* Very hard to see the white outline that flashes while shooting in ES, no fake ES sound option. Unless I cram my eye socket onto the EVF I can’t visualize the outer white frame and I need to look towards it instead of at my subject.
A9II Pros:
* More sticky erratic/fast bird tracking
* Can initiate RTT out of any AF mode from Single point (Small Flex Spot) all the way up to Wide (Full sensor Auto)
* Can assign a button to instantly change any regular AF mode into RTT (I use my lens button for this)
* Better buttons, especially the AF-ON
* Batteries in grip drain in sequence not in parallel
* ES, blackout free….the R5 ES is pretty darn good for not being a true live feed but the A9(II) experience is still better. More noticeable as subjects get faster and closer to the camera
* Four different choices of how shooting in ES is displayed and option for fake ES sound. For those with an A9 I’d recommend the blue option #2 which flashes a blue box over whatever shape your AF point is. Even when in Wide it is easier to see the flash around the outside of the frame compared to the R5’s white frame flash.
A9II Cons:
* Doesn’t have AED
* Shorter grip, grip tighter to lens (not for me personally but it is a thing)
* MS uses Live feed with real shutter blackout which I think is more difficult to track than the frame insertion of the R5 (but who would use MS on an A9?)
* Card writing speeds (really this is more an A7RIV con as the A9 it never affects me but for sure the R5 writes faster)
* No top LCD (personal preference)
If you own all Sony: Stick with Sony
If you own all Canon: Buy an R5 or R6
If you shoot Sony but kept a lot of Canon lenses OR if you are starting from scratch: A9II if you want to have the world’s best AF Tracking for fast/erratic subjects in ES. R5 for pretty much everything else. R5 for the best AF tracking if not having to erratically pan/track a fast BIF. If you are wanting higher MP I’d choose R5 over A7RIV (I think the R5 does basically everything better than the RIV). If you want lower MPs I’d choose A9II over R6 (of course those are vastly different price points) but only if you are really after challenging flight stuff otherwise R6 should be a great value if 20MP is enough.
Aug 23, 2020 at 06:49 PM
Previous versions of arbitrage's message #15325869 « Sony-shooters thoughts on the Canon R5/R6 »
