Scott Stoness
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
|
 Re: R5 17mp Crop files vs R10/R50 sensor | |
I have the r5 and r8. I have used the apsc mode on r5. I don't have comparison of apsc vs 17mpx r5 mode, but I do have observations:
1) The r8, is a spectacular camera for fps (30), eye focus, and has a better menu than the r5. The buffer responsiveness is way better (because it's 24mpx and this is great with a fast sd card) and the manual switch (to video or between modes) are way better. Its 1500usd. Its 4k is very easy to work with and I prefer it to my r5 if I can fill the frame. Its only downside is missing a c3 and 24mpx. If you fill the frame with your subject, it's as good as the r5 for wildlife. It matches the best apsc lens on apsc body or r5/apsc mode because it uses more glass.
2) The r8 weighs 450grams and combined with 16/2.8 (190grams and $300) and 24-105 ($400 and 390grams) makes a very light kit. Throw on the Rf 100-400 and it's a fantastic low weight.
3) I would buy the r8 over any apsc body or r5/apsc because its ff and uses more glass per animal eye at same distance, except r7 which has 33mpx. r7 out resolves r5/apsc mode in good light. Thedigitalpicture.com has comparisons.
4) I doubt that the r10, r100 would out resolve the r8 with rf stm 24-105 because of the smaller glass usage on an apsc.
5) I think the r8 plus long lens is more responsive and better than either r5 apsc or apsc
6) ff r8 r r5 non apsc has significantly higher dynamic range iso performance than any apsc body
Here is some data - download the r100 uncrossed and r5 and crop it to compare which is what r5/apsc mode is;
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r100-review#IQ
|
