# Canon 1DX iii or Canon R5 for wildlife photography?



## Setty (Jul 11, 2020)

I currently have a Canon R5 on pre-order but i feel like i could be making a very expensive mistake.

Firstly i want to say that i own the canon 1DX ii and that i am a wildlife photographer. I am interested in the R5 due to its animal AF capabilities and the 45MP. I feel that it will be beneficial to me.
But i also feel as i am used to the 1DX then maybe the R5 isn't for me, Smaller form, not as rugged, the battery life does concern me a little also. 

I have thought about getting the 1DX iii but it doesn't have the feature i am most looking forward too (animal AF)

Do you think that a R5 would be a good purchase if you owned a 1DX ii? would you consider it a downgrade even if it would be an additional camera (still keep the 1dx ii)

If you owned the 1DX II and was looking at getting a new camera what would be the deciding factors against the 1DX iii & R5 

Do you think the R5 animal AF is not a big deal against the 1DX iii AF?

I would love to hear peoples opinions, i feel it could make me look at things in a new light.

I have worked out that it will only be around £1500 in difference between the R5 & 1DX iii after i have brought the grip, another battery and a card for the R5


----------



## Kit. (Jul 11, 2020)

As a wildlife photographer, you should probably consider that with R5's 45 Mpixel sensor you will have up to 1.5 times longer reach using the same lens than with 1DX ii or iii.


----------



## padam (Jul 11, 2020)

Canon places the 1DX III highest in their product hierarchy, the R5 is a mirrorless 5D, so one level lower.

So yes, the 1DX III is their TOL model and it should have the edge for shooting fast action.
But the R5 DPAF does have a few tricks up its sleeve that should make it more accurate to focus in some situations and it is just easy to left it to its own devices and do its job.
I don't think professionals need to rely on these automated methods, they can get by with using back button focusing and tracking from the center of the frame.

For getting more reach the R5 has the edge with the extra resolution, if you need it.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 11, 2020)

It's all hypothetical as we don't know the capabilities of the R5 and whether you are more interested in action, like birds in flight, or more static shots. If the Sony A7RIII/IV and Sony A9/II are good reference comparisons for the R5 and 1DXIII, respectively, then judging by all the extensive discussions in the Sony forums, the A7R series are better for static shots because of their better resolution but they are no match for BIF.


----------



## ERHP (Jul 12, 2020)

Compared with the 1DX MK II, the III does a much better job of tracking and in zone modes, will pick out bird/animal heads when moving. That's as a DSLR. Put it in live view and it will capture small BIF provided you are pointed the right direction. Some of the original release videos showed this and now I've done it myself. Of course I bought(preorder) the R5 as well, mainly as a replacement for my 5DSR for macro and landscape but definitely plan to try it out on the 600 and 200-400. Until we actually get to bang on it, field use is really the unknown.

I'm honestly interested in seeing how the R6 compares, especially if it has the same sensor/DIGIC as the MK III.


----------



## Czardoom (Jul 12, 2020)

I'm not a wildlife photographer, but if I was, I think the biggest deciding factor would be OVF or EVF. And the only way I would be able to make a decision was to try out the R5 when it comes out (since you already have the 1DX II). 

What I would not do is base my decision on forum comments.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 12, 2020)

Czardoom said:


> I'm not a wildlife photographer, but if I was, I think the biggest deciding factor would be OVF or EVF. And the only way I would be able to make a decision was to try out the R5 when it comes out (since you already have the 1DX II).
> 
> What I would not do is base my decision on forum comments.


Especially from those who are not wildlife photographers.


----------



## Joules (Jul 12, 2020)

I have no experience with the 1 series. But from videos and the official specs I get the impression that on the 1DX III the LiveView offers better AF performance than the OVF. And from the same sources the R5 AF (regardless of EVF / LiveView) is better yet again. I expect a firmware update may come to the 1DX III to add the animal eye AF to the LiveView. Or not.

There are a lot of other factors at play though. We haven't had much independent opinions in the EVF performance for tracking action. Nor in the real world battery performance. As for the ruggedness, that's obviously a very subjective matter. Canon claims the R5 to be similar to a 5D IV. Until we get a teardown, we don't know, what that really means.

On Paper, 45 MP, IBIS and animal AF don't sound like a mistake to me though.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 12, 2020)

Rather than just pure technical aspects there is the build to take into consideration and what kind of wildlife you are doing. If you are on known paths and well built up areas and hides, I thing the R5 is solid. But when you fall over and roll down a hill or get caught up in a proper storm in the middle of a hostile area such as the Scottish highlands, which body will keep shooting? 

I am not convinced there is one right or best answer, but some cameras will stop shooting in environments a 1D body will keep on running. It isn't just AF and MP's. If you are used to a 1D body you might want to hold off for a R1 body. 

Maybe rent both and try them out, your 1dII hasn't suddenly stopped being a AAA camera with top notch AF.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 12, 2020)

Cancel the preorder, be patient and in a few weeks you'll know much better. 

I shoot primarily wildlife and consider 20 MPs inadequate possibly 20 to 40 percent of the time because of being FL limited with my most used 400 X2 choice. Virtually all my shots, unless I happen to be in a blind, get cropped enough that when I'm at ISO 3200 or above, which is often, the grain begins to show, so on paper the R5 appears to offer what I need, with the caveats that come with it being mirrorless and possibly suffering from those things that cause optical VF users to complain. The size, unless you have huge hands, will not be an issue although it will feel too small based on what we're most used to.

Also, I think it also comes down to this; can a 1 series lover be satisfied with a 5 series camera in every respect? Those who regularly shoot 5 and 1 would be able to offer their thoughts. For me, at this moment, I don't think I'd be any less conflicted regarding the R5 if I had bought the 5D4 instead of the 1DX2. I've grown to love some of the 1 series only, features such as the two buttons on the front below the shutter and the focusing modes available for both BB focusing options. In other words I presently have 3 regularly used "shutter button" choices based on my programming.

When reviews start showing up after serious photographers use it, we'll have a much better idea. And no matter how good it is, another product is going to show up sooner or later that is "on the other side and greener".

Jack


----------



## RiceCanon (Jul 12, 2020)

I can't speak to the 1DXiii choice, but what I'm wondering is if shooting wildlife with the R5 8K RAW video capability in conjunction with its apparently fantastic focus tracking and animal eye detection and then choosing stills from the video frames might be something to consider. I'm no expert on video but this possibility has me intrigued. I would love to hear from someone who knows much more about video than I do.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 12, 2020)

I own the 1DX II and will end up getting an R5, I wouldn’t sell the first to get the second because I see them very much as complimenting each other rather than one replacing the other.

For the MILC use I have had to date I can’t stand looking though an EVF for hours though the OLED 120Htz version in the R5 is supposed to be a big improvement. Many of the users I have seen are using the back screen to shoot and that is fine for many shorter focal lengths but when you get to longer lenses I don’t find that a productive method and have to use the viewfinder.

Now what id like, but Canon won’t give me, is a 1DX with the R5 sensor in it, why not Canon? You have the thing sitting there!


----------



## Kit. (Jul 12, 2020)

Canon could be unwilling to release a 1-series body that would be prone to overheating.


----------



## yungfat (Jul 12, 2020)

I personally think the biggest problem that Canon still do not announced any of 1 series mirrorless is probably because of the EVF refresh rate is still not up to sports and wildlife shooter expectations. Perhaps it may take another year or 2 for the EVF technology to catch the higher refresh rate that is really need for the 1 series mirrorless.

Canon is a professional camera builder, not home entertainment appliances maker, they know very well what photographer needs and wants, thus their different product line are well explained. 

If I were you, since 1DXII is still working fine, then I would probably hold on the purchase decision until the successor of the 1 series come out. 

There is no mean that R5 is a bad camera, but it is build as secondary class camera on mind (in Canon 1 series is always highest). We may see it obviously from the touch af, buffer rate, westhersealed level and price.

I not sure what lens you used for the wildlife, but if you are alway out of range, then the R5 45MP might come in handy.

All in all, if you want the best mirrorless in the market, R5 is here for you.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 12, 2020)

Regarding the capture of stills from the video. This has been discussed elsewhere quite a lot and generally it was depreciated. There are a good number of valid reasons why it's not a great idea with action situations the prime one being the lower shutter speed that is traditionally used for video. Some say the video is awful if higher speeds are used but the samples that I saw posted didn't convince me of this. However, I'm not a Hollywood movie watcher.

I did use this technique when in Costa Rica attempting to photograph a pair of Quetzals coming and going from a distant nest. I did get shots ... disappointing shots with two factors that I couldn't control - rain forest so far too high an ISO and the speed of the birds demonstrated that 1DX2 DPAF was 100% inadequate. You can't prefocus on a tree and expect the flight path to align or cross with any predictability, just luck. However, with the R5 they say faster AF AND the bird would be passing active AF points all the way across the viewfinder. Did I mention batteries going dead while trying to stay ready every second for the eventful event! At 4K60 I managed to get one sequence that would have been fantastic but it was OOF slightly. Being reach limited I was using 2X which is good on the 1DX2 but still must degrade AF.

Anyway, here is a random sample (not the best)








. BTW I was standing for hours for the 2 second moments. 

Jack


----------



## sanj (Jul 12, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Regarding the capture of stills from the video. This has been discussed elsewhere quite a lot and generally it was depreciated. There are a good number of valid reasons why it's not a great idea with action situations the prime one being the lower shutter speed that is traditionally used for video. Some say the video is awful if higher speeds are used but the samples that I saw posted didn't convince me of this. However, I'm not a Hollywood movie watcher.
> 
> I did use this technique when in Costa Rica attempting to photograph a pair of Quetzals coming and going from a distant nest. I did get shots ... disappointing shots with two factors that I couldn't control - rain forest so far too high an ISO and the speed of the birds demonstrated that 1DX2 DPAF was 100% inadequate. You can't prefocus on a tree and expect the flight path to align or cross with any predictability, just luck. However, with the R5 they say faster AF AND the bird would be passing active AF points all the way across the viewfinder. Did I mention batteries going dead while trying to stay ready every second for the eventful event! At 4K60 I managed to get one sequence that would have been fantastic but it was OOF slightly. Being reach limited I was using 2X which is good on the 1DX2 but still must degrade AF.
> 
> ...


Those hours help in finding God.


----------



## expatinasia (Jul 13, 2020)

The 1DX ii is an amazing camera. If I were you I would cancel the pre-order and wait for six months or so. I fully expect Canon to introduce a R1 (1DX equivalent in the R series) perhaps in 2021 (?) and that would most likely have a larger body, perhaps better weather sealing, battery etc. If they don't, you can still go and buy a R5 and one of those monster 800mm lenses - wow. That is what I am doing, I will look at the R series when the R1 comes out and they have the lenses I need for my work - whether I upgrade or not, will depend on my age, the cost and whether it is worth the hassle.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 13, 2020)

expatinasia said:


> The 1DX ii is an amazing camera. If I were you I would cancel the pre-order and wait for six months or so. I fully expect Canon to introduce a R1 (1DX equivalent in the R series) perhaps in 2021 (?) and that would most likely have a larger body, perhaps better weather sealing, battery etc. If they don't, you can still go and buy a R5 and one of those monster 800mm lenses - wow. That is what I am doing, I will look at the R series when the R1 comes out and they have the lenses I need for my work - whether I upgrade or not, will depend on my age, the cost and whether it is worth the hassle.


That's my thought as well. The single sticking point is Canon's apparent definition of flagship and what MPs flagship shooters want/need and it's clear to me that 20 is not ideal for my level of cropping. I certainly benefited significantly in going from 300 X2 to 400 X2, partly because the 1DX2 handles 2X AF so well compared to my former 6D (it was so hard to accept that I got no boost in MPs). However I suspect that something like 45 MPs with X1.4 would be better and if X2 still worked really well that would be helpful too. Finding subjects in the bushes at 800 is sometimes a negative so in that respect 600 is better, not to mention BIF where 800 can be tricky.

Personally, my smaller hands would prefer a slightly reduced size R1 (1D4 was plenty big) but weight is more my complaint. With the R5 Canon claims they listened to their users. I hope that's the case with the R1 and if they are listening they will either have more MPs or have two versions, IMHO.

Jack


----------



## H. Jones (Jul 14, 2020)

I've been evaluating a 1DX Mark III this past week from Canon Professional Services alongside my 1DX Mark II. I love it--it definitely feels like the most natural evolution of the Mark II-- but I don't see myself ever buying one. 

My favorite features so far are the new AF system, which feels about as good as it can possibly get, the AF joystick(which is taking some time to get used to, I can't find the sweet spot between it being too sensitive and not sensitive enough), wi-fi, and then finally something as simple as the light-up buttons, which are just such a nice finishing touch on an already perfect camera body. I've memorized the controls forever but... Honestly it just looks cool and removes any doubt in the dark. 

But in the end, I have an EOS R5 on pre-order, and looking at the long game, I feel like the future is definitely in RF glass and the extended capabilities of the RF mount. Tough to justify spending another $6500 on a camera that won't be able to use whatever crazy lens comes next from the RF mount. For the wildlife photography I do on the side of my paid work, I'm looking forward to having a 1.6x crop mode(in the viewfinder too) that still leaves you with 17 megapixels, and the DPAF mark II in live view on the 1DX Mark III has me pretty sold on the autofocus/shooting of the R5. There's no delay with the silent shutter 20 fps, and even in mechanical shutter the delay is very minor while shooting--it doesn't lag at all after a burst like it always does in live view on the 1DX Mark II. 

I wasn't a huge fan of the way the EOS R we use at my full-time job shoots and the EVF slideshow effect it has is too slow for wildlife, but I really think the R5 is going to change how I feel about this. At worst, if it somehow doesn't fit the bill, I highly doubt it'll be any slower than my secondary camera 5D mark III, and I'll continue using the 1DX Mark II for the high-speed uses and then replace it with the eventual R1.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 14, 2020)

H. Jones said:


> I've been evaluating a 1DX Mark III this past week from Canon Professional Services alongside my 1DX Mark II. I love it--it definitely feels like the most natural evolution of the Mark II-- but I don't see myself ever buying one.
> 
> My favorite features so far are the new AF system, which feels about as good as it can possibly get, the AF joystick(which is taking some time to get used to, I can't find the sweet spot between it being too sensitive and not sensitive enough), wi-fi, and then finally something as simple as the light-up buttons, which are just such a nice finishing touch on an already perfect camera body. I've memorized the controls forever but... Honestly it just looks cool and removes any doubt in the dark.
> 
> ...


Makes perfect sense to me.

Jack


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 15, 2020)

Setty said:


> I currently have a Canon R5 on pre-order but i feel like i could be making a very expensive mistake.
> 
> Firstly i want to say that i own the canon 1DX ii and that i am a wildlife photographer. I am interested in the R5 due to its animal AF capabilities and the 45MP. I feel that it will be beneficial to me.
> But i also feel as i am used to the 1DX then maybe the R5 isn't for me, Smaller form, not as rugged, the battery life does concern me a little also.
> ...



I would not consider the R5 (or any 5 series!) a downgrade from a 1DX2 for many shooters. I think those who would think of it as a downgrade have fairly niche use cases that demand the 1 series--those folks generally know who they are:

- Need a bulletproof camera for harsh conditions (conflict zones, extreme temps)
- Value speed above all. The 1DX's shutter modes still give you 65% more speed over the R5. Are you up against your 1D2's 14fps AF/AE limit frequently?
- Are driving big whites. I am under the impression that these lenses can be driven faster with the 1D's higher voltage battery (I don't know how a gripped 5 series compares) but folks who own them should chime in here
- Need some other 1-series exclusive feature (speaking of, why has nobody ever put an ethernet jack on a grip before? awesome idea)
- EVF/OVF preference, though this is not a "1 vs 5" issue strictly speaking

To me, the R5 seems to be an ideal wildlife camera for those who aren't shooting in extreme situations. I can't answer if you should upgrade or not, but I would only go to the 1DX3 if you hit the above boxes. I am not even sure how big issue #3 is—it's come up on these boards and others when comparing vs the 5D4 which has "the same" AF system as the 1D2.


----------



## scottkinfw (Jul 15, 2020)

Setty said:


> I currently have a Canon R5 on pre-order but i feel like i could be making a very expensive mistake.
> 
> Firstly i want to say that i own the canon 1DX ii and that i am a wildlife photographer. I am interested in the R5 due to its animal AF capabilities and the 45MP. I feel that it will be beneficial to me.
> But i also feel as i am used to the 1DX then maybe the R5 isn't for me, Smaller form, not as rugged, the battery life does concern me a little also.
> ...




Hi Jack.

I have the 1DXII, and my passion is wildlife photography. I can't always shoot animals in the wild, so I also shoot landscapes, events, some portraits. I purchased the same accessories (less expensive grip) along with (the more expensive) adapter. I love my 1DXII. I ordered the R5 and don't consider it a downgrade.

The 1DXII is very heavy and big on it's own especially with an L-bracket and big whites. Add a second camera and a tripod and to the mix and unless you are very big and strong, it is difficult to carry on hikes. The size/weight will be an issue on international flights with a weight limit of 20 Kg. When I go on tours/photo shoots I always take two bodies, and sometimes filters. My second camera currently is the 5DIII.

I think the animal AF is a is an important feature. The size/weight is very important to me. I'm not concerned at all about the battery (can always slip fully charged ones in during a break in the action). The R5's higher MP count is important to me, I think this is a very good MP count that shows greater detail/resolution vs. 1DXII (1DXIII?) and yet, the FPS is 12/20, so it is a sweet spot for me. I am looking forward to seeing what the new sensor will do.

Even with the accessories, the R5 is cheaper.

So for me, the size/weight, MP count, animal AF were all important. This is the first prosumer l sports/action/wildlife mirrorless that Canon put out and will likely have some quirks. Still, I think that later iterations will be even better and that this is where we will be headed. I am not worried about the durability of the camera at all or ergonomics. If/when Canon comes out with an R1, I'll be comfortable moving up.

Frankly, I'm excited to get the R5.

These are my values and my thoughts on the R5. If you have doubts about your choice, you can cancel the order and later, rent one before committing. Don't buy the camera unless you really WANT it, because it doesn't seem like you really NEED it. 

Regards,

scott


----------



## scottkinfw (Jul 15, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Especially from those who are not wildlife photographers.


Touche, and ouch!


----------



## scottkinfw (Jul 15, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Yes, good for the soul but not so for the knees and back, waiting with one hand on the trigger. About 8 hours in total with mixed results but at least I now have seen the Quetzals that the natives revered. Quite the bird.


On the other hand, you were shooting in very difficult conditions. Dark birds, likely poor lighting


Jack Douglas said:


> Yes, good for the soul but not so for the knees and back, waiting with one hand on the trigger. About 8 hours in total with mixed results but at least I now have seen the Quetzals that the natives revered. Quite the bird.


I'll just remind you about wildlife photography. It is a matter of luck and being at the right place at the right time, and of course, technical skill. You were shooting in difficult conditions, and unless you had supplemental lighting (maybe with a better beamer) it would be unreasonable to expect a much better result. It is the lot in life for a wildlife photographer.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 15, 2020)

scottkinfw said:


> On the other hand, you were shooting in very difficult conditions. Dark birds, likely poor lighting
> 
> I'll just remind you about wildlife photography. It is a matter of luck and being at the right place at the right time, and of course, technical skill. You were shooting in difficult conditions, and unless you had supplemental lighting (maybe with a better beamer) it would be unreasonable to expect a much better result. It is the lot in life for a wildlife photographer.


No reminder needed! I'm not a particularly lucky person but with my camera I've had more than my share of luck. My only photographic virtue is persistence. And yes the lighting was so bad and then a mist came in making the results so disappointing. There were some that were a little better but clearly the camera couldn't focus fast enough. Looking at the second shot you'll realize why I was so disappointed because of what it might have been. Would the R5 have made a difference??


----------



## AlanF (Jul 15, 2020)

scottkinfw said:


> On the other hand, you were shooting in very difficult conditions. Dark birds, likely poor lighting
> 
> I'll just remind you about wildlife photography. It is a matter of luck and being at the right place at the right time, and of course, technical skill. You were shooting in difficult conditions, and unless you had supplemental lighting (maybe with a better beamer) it would be unreasonable to expect a much better result. It is the lot in life for a wildlife photographer.


As Louis Pasteur said, “Luck favours the well-prepared photographer”


----------



## Bennymiata (Jul 15, 2020)

I've seen a couple of videos of the R5 in the hands of pro wildlife photographers, and the animal eye detect is a gamechanger as they reckon it focuses on the eye of the bird from quite a distance.
One of them showed a run of about 20 shots of a bird diving and coming towards him and every shot had perfect focus.
I reckon the focussing system will be a godsend for wildlife photographers.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 15, 2020)

Bennymiata said:


> I've seen a couple of videos of the R5 in the hands of pro wildlife photographers, and the animal eye detect is a gamechanger as they reckon it focuses on the eye of the bird from quite a distance.
> One of them showed a run of about 20 shots of a bird diving and coming towards him and every shot had perfect focus.
> I reckon the focussing system will be a godsend for wildlife photographers.


I'm cautiously hoping you're right on that one!

Jack


----------



## scottkinfw (Jul 16, 2020)

AlanF said:


> As Louis Pasteur said, “Luck favours the well-prepared photographer”


I absolutely agree. I was thinking that I should have said (not as eloquently as Louis), that you have to be ready to shoot before you get to the site. Sadly, I missed my best shots learning and re-learning that addage.
Thank you.

scott


----------



## mkamelg (Jul 19, 2020)

Published July 18, 2020






A few questions and answers to them from the comments posted below the video.
 
Q: Anand Iyer Wow the eye AF looks pretty amazing. What would you say the hit rate is when eye AF is locked on during burst shooting?
A: Andrew Beck 90% + easily! It hardly skips a beat.
 
Q: David Francescangeli Which lenses have been used? 100-400II ef with adapter rf-ef and?....
A: Andrew Beck In addition to the 100-400mm MKII I used the 400mm F2.8 MKII paired with 1.4X and 2X converters whilst in the field on this occassion.
 
Q: Jason Koch Is there any blackout with it set to 120 refresh rate?
A: Andrew Beck I pushed this to the extreme by panning and using slower shutter speeds to see how the camera performed and I must say that it is hardly noticeable. The AF system works hard to maintain focus throughout as well. A vast improvement on the R and RP as you’d expect.
 
Q: Jason Koch Andrew Beck So there is some blackout?
A: Andrew Beck No more than what you’d expect with a DSLR at slower shutter speeds as far as I’m concerned.
A: Jason Koch Andrew Beck Thanks for the info.
A: Andrew Beck My pleasure, watch the top left corner of the clip and you’ll see when actual images were captured and how negligible any blackout is. Hope that helps!

Later, there was also a discussion between commenters with a question that had not yet been answered.

Chas Moonie @Andrew Beck Thanks Andrew, is the viewfinder blackout free @ 20 fps like Sony A9 or do you have to use the LCD screen for blackout free @ 20fps, I have pre ordered R5 , fingers crossed

Quivver77 This is an important question. If there is blackout then I will have to wait for the R1 or R1x (1dx equivalent). If you're shooting a cheetah hunt you can't have a blackout while tracking otherwise you'll be constantly behind the action. Yes DSLR has blackouts but your mind fills in the gaps and allows you to follow the action - unless the blackout in the R5 is that short the lag will make it hard to shoot fast action. Please test for this extreme condition case.

Chas Moonie @Quivver77 I can't get anyone to answer this question, I have asked at least six R5 reviewers and nobody will answer !

Quivver77 @Chas Moonie That is frankly worrying. Because a fast AF by itself is not enough. I am looking to move from the 1dx II to mirrorless but unless the system has zero lag there is simply no way I would do it. Yes - blackouts exist in DSLR's but the mirror slap is very fast and our brains can process that missed frame and still keep focus (plus the optical viewfinder has NO LAG). But if there is lag in the R5 (EVF) and it takes a few miliseconds for the image to process and another few miliseconds for the EVF to update the subject will already be in a different location. If you are dealing with a fast subject it will essentially jump frames. Something that will make photography not only difficult but very annoying. Andrew Beck is a wildlife photographer so he should understand and know this problem as i'm sure he's used DSLR's extensively in these kinds of high frame rate action situations. Honest review would be appreciated.

Chas Moonie @Quivver77 I would be surprised if R5 is blackout free in viewfinder like A9. The EVF refresh rate is 120, some say this will help but I don't have sufficient technical knowledge ?? I had 1DXII and EOS R and EOS R was ok for non action stuff only.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

I don't know how I have ever managed to take a photo of a bird without eye-AF. I had better delete the lot and start all over again.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I don't know how I have ever managed to take a photo of a bird without eye-AF. I had better delete the lot and start all over again.


was that back to your film days? surely not with your Canon DSLR. Right?


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 19, 2020)

The R5 has so much potential, that I would just get it now, use it for awhile, and if it is too disappointing in some respect, sell it. It should hold value really well in the first year. There will always be better cameras arriving later.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> was that back to your film days? surely not with your Canon DSLR. Right?


I like eye-AF in liveview on my 90D and RX10IV for human portraits. But, for birds, if I ever get the opportunity see anything interesting in these covid times, it would rarely make much difference for me.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I don't know how I have ever managed to take a photo of a bird without eye-AF. I had better delete the lot and start all over again.


And, check the link to flickr. Almost exclusively birds sitting in a tree or pond. Nothing wrong with them, but any camera would be fine for them.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 19, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> I would not consider the R5 (or any 5 series!) a downgrade from a 1DX2 for many shooters. I think those who would think of it as a downgrade have fairly niche use cases that demand the 1 series--those folks generally know who they are:
> 
> - Need a bulletproof camera for harsh conditions (conflict zones, extreme temps)
> - Value speed above all. The 1DX's shutter modes still give you 65% more speed over the R5. Are you up against your 1D2's 14fps AF/AE limit frequently?
> ...


I have one on order as well. I have a 30 day return period in case I don't like the way it works for me. I have returned one camera in the last 20+ years because I was disappointed, so its possible but unlikely.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 19, 2020)

And the R5 doesn't have the AF-ON back button exactly where it is on the 1DX2 rendering it useless for me.  My ideal camera must have legs, a brain with perfect AI and long range transmission to heaven and hell (just in case).

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> And the R5 doesn't have the AF-ON back button exactly where it is on the 1DX2 rendering it useless for me.  My ideal camera must have legs, a brain with perfect AI and long range transmission to heaven and hell (just in case).
> 
> Jack


I am afraid it's purgatory for you, and the WiFi won't work there.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I don't know how I have ever managed to take a photo of a bird without eye-AF. I had better delete the lot and start all over again.


Joking apart, I know that many of my bird images - even some of the best - were not focused on the eye, but elsewhere on the body, because I didn't have time to move the AF to the ideal "on the eye" position.

If the R5's animal/bird AF can streamline that aspect for me - and it's looking promising - I'm really struggling to see a downside to the camera. Yes, the pixel density means I'll lose a bit of effective reach compared to the 7D Mk II, but it'll improve significantly over my 1D-x, and that's the camera I use most, just because of how responsive and intuitive it feels in the hand.

The other deal-breaker for me is to be able to use Auto ISO in Manual _and _be able to easily adjust the EC: I can't imagine for a second that the R5 won't have that ability, so...

Oh - and and AF-On button in a sensible place, of course - thanks for the reminder, Jack..!


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> Joking apart, I know that many of my bird images - even some of the best - were not focused on the eye, but elsewhere on the body, because I didn't have time to move the AF to the ideal "on the eye" position.
> 
> If the R5's animal/bird AF can streamline that aspect for me - and it's looking promising - I'm really struggling to see a downside to the camera. Yes, the pixel density means I'll lose a bit of effective reach compared to the 7D Mk II, but it'll improve significantly over my 1D-x, and that's the camera I use most, just because of how responsive and intuitive it feels in the hand.
> 
> ...


I never move the AF point for bird photography for two main reasons. First, I am rarely sufficiently close that I need to - cropping is my middle name. Secondly, I use back button focus and on the very rare occasions the bird is too large in the frame, I focus on on the eye and recompose in a fraction of a second. I do agree eye AF would be useful in the second case. What is more important for me is for the camera to latch on quickly to a bird in flight. The R5 will not sacrifice reach to the 7DII, which attracts me to it - the 5DSR outresolves the 7DII and Canon claims the R5 outresolves then5DSR.


----------



## stevelee (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I don't know how I have ever managed to take a photo of a bird without eye-AF. I had better delete the lot and start all over again.


I'm curious about the appeal of pictures of birds where the eye(s) is/are in focus, but the rest of the bird is not. I bet that will be hard to do with the new f/11 lenses. I hope someone starts a new thread to post those pictures. I'm interested in the appeal. Maybe it works for birds better than on people.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

stevelee said:


> I'm curious about the appeal of pictures of birds where the eye(s) is/are in focus, but the rest of the bird is not. I bet that will be hard to do with the new f/11 lenses. I hope someone starts a new thread to post those pictures. I'm interested in the appeal. Maybe it works for birds better than on people.


It's one of the tropes that if the eye is in focus then the image is OK. But, you need a lot more than that, a pose that has the beak in sharp focus and sufficient of the rest of the bird. If the eye isn't in focus, it usually detracts from the image.


----------



## digigal (Jul 19, 2020)

This award winning picture, soon to be displayed in the British Museum of Natural History exhibit has the main focus point on the krill and not the eye. Taken with the 7DMII and EF 100-400 II.
Catherine


----------



## Nelu (Jul 19, 2020)

digigal said:


> This award winning picture, soon to be displayed in the British Museum of Natural History exhibit has the main focus point on the krill and not the eye. Taken with the 7DMII and EF 100-400 II.
> Catherine
> View attachment 191422


Catherine, that's a fantastic shot!


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 19, 2020)

digigal said:


> This award winning picture, soon to be displayed in the British Museum of Natural History exhibit has the main focus point on the krill and not the eye. Taken with the 7DMII and EF 100-400 II.
> Catherine
> View attachment 191422


So, did the photographer focus on the krill on purpose or was it pure luck? I’m guessing the latter. Maybe the photographer can chime in. Great shot!


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

digigal said:


> This award winning picture, soon to be displayed in the British Museum of Natural History exhibit has the main focus point on the krill and not the eye. Taken with the 7DMII and EF 100-400 II.
> Catherine
> View attachment 191422


Was that one of your European shots? Very, very nice indeed with krill. Here's a Farne one focussed on the eyes of the more usual sandeels (5DIV + 400mm DO II). Do you think eye AF would have picked them up? Wish I had your blue sky in the background.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> So, did the photographer focus on the krill on purpose or was it pure luck? I’m guessing the latter. Maybe the photographer can chime in. Great shot!


The key point is that if the camera had focussed on the eye, the krill would have been out of focus.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> The key point is that if the camera had focussed on the eye, the krill would have been out of focus.


More DOF would probably help there...


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> More DOF would probably help there...


Like a DO f/11. These puffins move so damn fast it's all you can do to keep up with them.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Like a DO f/11. These puffins move so damn fast it's all you can do to keep up with them.


Exactly! I’m struggling just to keep passing shots, like these fast puffins, in the frame, let alone pick the exact focus point. A camera that could choose the eye to focus on would sure help me.


----------



## digigal (Jul 19, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> So, did the photographer focus on the krill on purpose or was it pure luck? I’m guessing the latter. Maybe the photographer can chime in. Great shot!


I have a series of shots of the bird as it flew by and with all of them sharp in the sequence (that's essentially a full frame shot--just a sliver cropped off the top), I generally try to focus on a part of the bird that is in the same plane as the eye but in this frame the bird's head was slightly behind and the servo focus caught the beak and krill. 
Catherine


----------



## digigal (Jul 19, 2020)

Picture was taken at dusk at ISO 800, f/5.6, 1/500


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 19, 2020)

digigal said:


> Picture was taken at dusk at ISO 800, f/5.6, 1/500


And Canon aren’t updating the 7D Series 
Lovely picture, as is Alans but the evening glow in yours is special.
I love Puffins !


----------



## digigal (Jul 20, 2020)

Sporgon said:


> And Canon aren’t updating the 7D Series
> Lovely picture, as is Alans but the evening glow in yours is special.
> I love Puffins !


Thanks so much but it's very noisy because I was really fighting the ISO vs speed because I'm am an ancient LOL and the 7D + 100-400 is the heaviest thing I can carry and still get where I'm going so I shoot all handheld. If I had to carry a tripod and heavier lens I'd never be able to schlep all the stuff to the birds/animals to photograph them. I'm just hoping that with the extra megapixels, the extender, and the better ISO I'll be able to eke out a little bit better pictures with the R5. I think I've about milked the 7DMkII as much as I can. I've been using the R for some birding and like it for larger bird scenes. I just had another one of my bird pictures come out in the Audubon Top 100 this week and so did a guy that posts here who shot his with an R (gorgeous tropic bird in flight) He's much more successful than I am with the R, but I think that it can be quite good for the first couple of shots. It's just the tracking that's difficult with the EVF. I do like it and if the R5 improves that (which all indications are that it does), it should be great for me.
Catherine


----------



## Click (Jul 20, 2020)

digigal said:


> This award winning picture, soon to be displayed in the British Museum of Natural History exhibit has the main focus point on the krill and not the eye. Taken with the 7DMII and EF 100-400 II.
> Catherine




Beautiful shot. Well done, Catherine.


----------



## docsmith (Jul 20, 2020)

For those that have owned/used the 1D line, how much truth is there to the extra volts of the 1D line in providing a faster AF?

Also, I look at the shutter lag and the R5 is a nice 50 mS, but the 1DX is 28-50 mS.

The R5 is coming in better than I expected. There are some obvious advantages (Animal Eye AF, MPs, etc). But I am wondering if the 1D line still holds distinct advantages. I would appreciate anyone's thoughts on what those may be in addition to what I've listed.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 21, 2020)

docsmith said:


> For those that have owned/used the 1D line, how much truth is there to the extra volts of the 1D line in providing a faster AF?
> 
> Also, I look at the shutter lag and the R5 is a nice 50 mS, but the 1DX is 28-50 mS.
> 
> The R5 is coming in better than I expected. There are some obvious advantages (Animal Eye AF, MPs, etc). But I am wondering if the 1D line still holds distinct advantages. I would appreciate anyone's thoughts on what those may be in addition to what I've listed.


I can only say from my experience moving from the 6D to 1D4 and then 1DX2 that there was better AF drive with the extenders but I have no idea what the R5 will be capable of. I'm waiting just like you to hear.

Jack


----------



## bernie_king (Jul 21, 2020)

I am a 1DX II wildlife shooter and have ordered an R5. Luckily, I don't have to sell my 1DX II to fund the R5 so I will do a comparison to see which does the job better. I ordered it because I rarely can get by without cropping my images (even with a 600f4 with extenders) and the extra resolution would be absolutely make a huge difference. Now, the question is if it will track fast moving animals and birds and drive the 600 properly. I don't know. I'm sure it'll do a great job on static objects and will handle as much inclement weather as I am willing to withstand so no worries there. I'm looking forward to testing them both together. If the R5 does a better job, I'll likely sell the 1DX II and pick up either a 2nd R5 or an R6 for low light. As exciting as an R1 sounds it's not likely to be a high resolution monster and I think you need at least one of those for wildlife so long as it can keep up with the animals.

Keep in mind that the 1 series, while coveted by wildlife shooters, is really designed for professional sports photographers. That's a whole different level of speed and work.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 21, 2020)

bernie_king said:


> I am a 1DX II wildlife shooter and have ordered an R5. Luckily, I don't have to sell my 1DX II to fund the R5 so I will do a comparison to see which does the job better. I ordered it because I rarely can get by without cropping my images (even with a 600f4 with extenders) and the extra resolution would be absolutely make a huge difference. Now, the question is if it will track fast moving animals and birds and drive the 600 properly. I don't know. I'm sure it'll do a great job on static objects and will handle as much inclement weather as I am willing to withstand so no worries there. I'm looking forward to testing them both together. If the R5 does a better job, I'll likely sell the 1DX II and pick up either a 2nd R5 or an R6 for low light. As exciting as an R1 sounds it's not likely to be a high resolution monster and I think you need at least one of those for wildlife so long as it can keep up with the animals.
> 
> Keep in mind that the 1 series, while coveted by wildlife shooters, is really designed for professional sports photographers. That's a whole different level of speed and work.


Please keep your promise in a timely fashion. 

Jack


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 24, 2020)

I've loved me a few 1D bodies over the years. They were brutes that excelled above the others through the heyday of the 5d3. Critically back then, they also had similar resolution as those bodies they lorded over. 

About the time the 5d4 came around, things weren't so clear. It depended on what you shot. Sports photographers and PJs naturally stayed with the 1D series. Resolution above 20mp is somewhat of a nuisance for them it seems. Wildlife people did all sorts of things, again, depending on what they shot. Reach limited guys sometimes used the 5DsR of all things. Some used the 5D4 (I moved to that for the 1.5x resolution and improved sensor). Some went to the A9 (I did that too, eventually, to complement an A7r4 that was dripped with vinegar from 60 megapickles).

So here we all meet up again smoking cigars in the nursery ward of the Canon R5, asking ourselves which would be better: the 1DX3 or the R5; a question that dates us all to the times when people took pictures and didn't care about video and heat whatever the heck vlogging is or was. It appears from what you read on the web that it's only we who care to answer this. 

While we can't know for sure, we can surely see that there's very little the R5 can't do that the 1DX3 does, and there's quite a lot it does the 1DX3 can't. Canon being Canon, I wouldn't be surprised if a 1 series in the R format might not do a lot more than give a different form factor. Add some girth to seem girthy, like the outwardly bowed panels on a Ram truck, hiding the small production bits dwelling inside. Slap on the ethernet and other connecting parts that <1/100th of 1 percent of the buyers will ever use. Come to think of it, that could be a good description of the A9II's "upgrade."

To the original person who asked the question, I find myself coming down this way: The 1 series isn't the future. Don't sweat the status implied by slumming with a 5 series, when it beats the pants off the 1 series, at least for now. But do cancel your pre-order for the R5 because I got to watching the vapid Canon video when they were releasing it, and I only pre-ordered 10 minutes in, so there are a bunch of jerks like you in line ahead of me.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 24, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> I've loved me a few 1D bodies over the years. They were brutes that excelled above the others through the heyday of the 5d3. Critically back then, they also had similar resolution as those bodies they lorded over.
> 
> About the time the 5d4 came around, things weren't so clear. It depended on what you shot. Sports photographers and PJs naturally stayed with the 1D series. Resolution above 20mp is somewhat of a nuisance for them it seems. Wildlife people did all sorts of things, again, depending on what they shot. Reach limited guys sometimes used the 5DsR of all things. Some used the 5D4 (I moved to that for the 1.5x resolution and improved sensor). Some went to the A9 (I did that too, eventually, to complement an A7r4 that was dripped with vinegar from 60 megapickles).
> 
> ...


I really don't understand why Canon didn't continue with high and low resolution 1 series cameras. I can't imagine wildlife shoots other than those in a blind or in a nature reserve, not cropping. It just seemed wrong to not offer 1 series features in a higher resolution body but the R5 is getting closer - no fancy joystick though.

Jack


----------



## CvH (Jul 24, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> The other deal-breaker for me is to be able to use Auto ISO in Manual _and _be able to easily adjust the EC: I can't imagine for a second that the R5 won't have that ability, so...



I use the Auto ISO in Manual exposure mode and EC on the R frequently so I am confident that it will be on both R5 & R6.


----------



## tron (Jul 24, 2020)

Chz said:


> I use the Auto ISO in Manual exposure mode and EC on the R frequently so I am confident that it will be on both R5 & R6.


I believe that too. This has been a feature for long: 7DII, 5DsR, 5DIV, 90D, EOS R (I am writing about cameras I have or had I am sure the 1 series cameras have it too...)


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 24, 2020)

Yep, I'm confident that it's A Thing for the R5 - it's just one of the most important of my checklist items, because I rely on it completely.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 24, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> I really don't understand why Canon didn't continue with high and low resolution 1 series cameras. I can't imagine wildlife shoots other than those in a blind or in a nature reserve, not cropping. It just seemed wrong to not offer 1 series features in a higher resolution body but the R5 is getting closer - no fancy joystick though.
> 
> Jack



The day the X came out 8.09 years ago, it was hot here. Reached 95 degrees in the early afternoon, causing some sweaty hours refreshing the status page on the web sales page after we'd been able to pre-order earlier in the morning. That part sounds familiar here in 2020. 

The messaging materials were quite different. The ones Canon put out that morning were the sort not uncommon among Asian electronics conglomerates of the day. They were aspirational and deliberately vague. In the mid-90s through to about 5 years ago, large Asian firms tended to have US ad agencies develop branding campaigns concentrating on a general, universal concept. To flesh out that concept into tactical details, showing how a product allowed a user to exploit that concept would be to ruin the art of it. The belief was that to explicitly explain the concept would be to destroy its power, as an artist would ruin the value of an oil by narrating each stroke. You add on top of that a very serious cultural translation incompatibility between the electronics client and the agency, and, well, you got some pretty odd branding stuff. There were whole websites dedicated to this. Today we have "See Impossible," which, well, yeah. What you could take away from the campaigns of the day was generally a gist of where the company believed it was heading and why. 

Canon's general branding message, starting about 13 months before the launch was "Imagin8ion." Under that theme, the product message on that day with the 1DX was that it was the crossover product. In a world where 18 megapickles was considered more than adequate, this was credible. You may recall that this was right when the 5D3 was launched, the successor to the break-out video rig the 5D2. Canon appeared to be attempting to create an uber camera that it could produce at efficient scale and sell as the top dog to all the niche markets. From a manufacturer's incremental cost perspective, this made a lot of sense; and is the primary answer to Jack's question above. 

But this world that Canon partly predicted and partly conceived - the one where 18 MP was adequate for all things; and where a video rig would be used for landscape shots - was never stable. It would have been more stable had the pesky competition not gone and released a number of bodies that made clear we were missing some things others were being given: resolution, dynamic range, video features, and even, eventually, frame speed. But from that hot day in June onward, there doesn't appear to have been an effort among the product managers of the 1 series to be everything to all in its later revisions. Canon evidently did believe that 18 MP was adequate for all markets. They were mistaken, we now know, but they appear to have genuinely believed it. 

Products starting design processes that summer wouldn't come out until 2016. The releases in 2016 show us what Canon believed at the moment they were launching the 1DX, and this included the 1DX II, which really doubled-down on the low resolution. It did not attempt to become more useful for landscape or other genres requiring more resolution. The 5D IV was released in that year's late August, and exploded the X concept utterly. It showed that the 5DsR wasn't a fluke. Canon's very perception of the camera world had shifted, and we learned this had happened without us knowing four years earlier, right when the marketing materials were pushing the crossover concept. 

This should have been good news for Jack. Canon was making cameras for markets again, rather than just levels of cameras for everyone. But then - and now - there is stubborn confusion among pros and would-be pros about the brand status of the 1 series. Is it the best? Is it the best for a particular purpose? Canon has answered this as clearly as Canon gives answers: The 1 series is the best for the purpose of taking low resolution shots - which is most important for PJs, sports togs, and non-reach-limited wildlife shooters - and getting those images off the camera quickly. The coming R5 may be better by a significant margin for other purposes, and maybe even some of the ones listed above. It is not in the nature of a large Japanese electronics firm to tell you this explicitly. That would destroy the artistic effect of its assembled collection of cameras. Your high resolution best camera exists, and it isn't and won't be in a 1 body. The "cladding" that beefs up the 1 series body to look like a man's man's camera may be applied to a higher-end R body in the future, but it will likely be to suit the man's man market, not the landscape/product photography pro market. 

Today is 69 degrees and sunny in a wet woods here in Vermont. I'm going to take my two young kids out there right after I finish typing this and try to "see impossible" or "imagin8" or something. With an EOS R on an adapter on a 1.4x teleconverter on a 600 f/4 II. An insanely inappropriate combination for now, awaiting the release of the R5 in just 6 days.


----------



## TominNJ (Jul 24, 2020)

the 1DX III is more rugged and will take more hard use and rough handling. Going to shoot in the rain? Hot dusty conditions? Extreme cold? Bouncy 4 wheel drive vehicles on rocky roads?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 24, 2020)

[email protected] said:


> The day the X came out 8.09 years ago, it was hot here. Reached 95 degrees in the early afternoon, causing some sweaty hours refreshing the status page on the web sales page after we'd been able to pre-order earlier in the morning. That part sounds familiar here in 2020.
> 
> The messaging materials were quite different. The ones Canon put out that morning were the sort not uncommon among Asian electronics conglomerates of the day. They were aspirational and deliberately vague. In the mid-90s through to about 5 years ago, large Asian firms tended to have US ad agencies develop branding campaigns concentrating on a general, universal concept. To flesh out that concept into tactical details, showing how a product allowed a user to exploit that concept would be to ruin the art of it. The belief was that to explicitly explain the concept would be to destroy its power, as an artist would ruin the value of an oil by narrating each stroke. You add on top of that a very serious cultural translation incompatibility between the electronics client and the agency, and, well, you got some pretty odd branding stuff. There were whole websites dedicated to this. Today we have "See Impossible," which, well, yeah. What you could take away from the campaigns of the day was generally a gist of where the company believed it was heading and why.
> 
> ...



Wow, I think you summarized it all very correctly. I never dreamed of being this serious about hobby photography but the seeds were sewn when I was in my 20's with an F1. Trouble is life was far too busy, mostly due to my own choices but some major happenings threw a monkey wrench into my existence. About 10 years ago an acquaintance who was to become a very good friend and partner in crime (photography) showed me what DSLRs had become and the features blew me away.

It was then I dared to present a plan to my wife - a D5100 and a 70-300 that totalled more than I felt I should ever spend and, well she encouraged it and all future purchases as I demonstrated that I really do love nature photography and was producing great photos (by the standards of those who are close to me). The 6D was a "in my ignorance" choice that proved to be very fortunate (I didn't even know what "crop" meant at that time) and the 300 2.8 II with converters was a dream come true. 

Then CR reared its ugly head and I started noticing posts by AlanF - we know Alan strives for excellence and his influence on me has been bad - a 1DX2 and 400 DO II bad. And there is one decision that was really hard given that I knew that I needed more pixels but my wife wanted me to have the "best" camera as in "Cadillac". I tried hard to explain how the 5D4 might be better but the video features won out in my decision. 

And now here is the R5 finally checking most of the boxes but not having all the 1 series features, like the two front buttons etc. Well, at least there is one front button. 

And why would I even be contemplating what I have not being more than enough! It's illogical, ridiculous, unexplainable GAS. Actually it's not given that the R5 would have been such an easy choice when I was agonizing over the 1DX2 and 5D4. Life is too good for photographers these days .... if they have spare cash.

Jack


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 24, 2020)

TominNJ said:


> the 1D III is more rugged and will take more hard use and rough handling. Going to shoot in the rain? Hot dusty conditions? Extreme cold? Bouncy 4 wheel drive vehicles on rocky roads?


Please understand there is a 1D III and a 1DX III, to many it might seem obvious which is meant but it can lead to confusion now and in the future.


----------



## TominNJ (Jul 24, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Please understand there is a 1D III and a 1DX III, to many it might seem obvious which is meant but it can lead to confusion now and in the future.



absolutely right. corrected to 1DX III


----------

