# buying choice: 5DS vs. RP



## jaell (Nov 13, 2019)

OK, without going into details (ugly divorce issues), I've lost access to my 5DMkIV and my IR-converted 6D until late summer of 2020.

I primarily shoot landscapes (esp. HDR), travel, portraits (mostly of my kids), and occasionally mess around with macro shots of flowers and butterflies. Since I got the 100-400L, I've found bird photography to be something I want to try a bit more, but I'm not prioritizing that.

So, without access to my camera gear, I need to get a stopgap solution for the next 10 months, something that eventually I might convert to IR photography when I move on and sell off the 6D (or maybe covert for astrophotography, if I save up and buy a Sigma 14mm f/1.8).

Ignore price (mostly), but I'm comparing the 5DS vs. the RP. My simple pros and cons are this:


*5DS pros*: big resolution, double that of the RP; form factor I'm used to; feature set and many functions similar to what I've grown used to with the 5DMkIV; native fit for my entire lens kit--which I've invested 10+K in and pretty much completed
*5DS cons*: I know I said "ignore price," but the grey-market deal I can get is still 30% higher than what I can get an RP for; mirror box will cut off bokeh balls with my 85mm f/1.4 L; mirrorslapper could be dinosaur technology in 5 years; larger DLR aperture than the RP (might be detrimental when I shoot landscapes at f/22 to get star-points on a sun)


*RP pros*: newer technology and mount, with some very appealing lenses. If mirrorless is the future and the EVF is as good or better than OVF, I can see myself transitioning to mirrorless bodies when I replace my 5DMkIV; better autofocus performance, especially in low light (one reason why I've shied away from astrophotography--I've had problems with focusing in the dark); focus bracketing (which might be nice to have when I shoot macro)
*RP cons*: need the adapter to use all my current lenses; I'm not sold on the EVF; I like the idea of being able to crop shots and retain IQ with the 5DS; I'm not about to spend $2K+ per lens on the RF mount after spending $10K+ over the past 5 years filling out my EF mount kit.


I think I've pretty much covered it. Basically, I'm shy about moving to mirrorless, even as a short-term replacement and long-term backup body, so that's why I'm thinking about spending $300 more on a grey-market 5DS that is 5 year old technology.

Your thoughts?


----------



## AlanF (Nov 13, 2019)

You may not be prioritising bird photography but the 5DS + 100-400mm Is a killer combination for that. It will outperform the RP in AF and resolution by a country mile.


----------



## jaell (Nov 13, 2019)

So the 5DS is better for AF of moving subjects?

Over the past few years, I've found that AF performance is very important to me, so if there's an advantage one way or the other, that is probably going to seal the deal.


----------



## AlanF (Nov 13, 2019)

jaell said:


> So the 5DS is better for AF of moving subjects?
> 
> Over the past few years, I've found that AF performance is very important to me, so if there's an advantage one way or the other, that is probably going to seal the deal.


I use the centre 9 points for birds in flight and find the camera (5DSR - same apart from AA-filter) latches on very quickly and precisely.


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 13, 2019)

Sorry, confused, do you have lenses or don't you? You say you haven no access, but part of your "RP cons" is needing an adapter for all your lenses? Just trying to understand how much EF gear is involved in your decision process.

If you do have a substantial number of lenses, there is nothing wrong with staying with a dSLR. And there is nothing wrong with using the adapter (if you thought you could get by with the RP until finances and RF body options are more favorable), other than the time involved in putting the adapter on your lenses.

Personally, the more I use the R, the more impressed I am by the IQ with the Rf 50mm f/1.2L; however, if I could only afford one body an no new Rf lenses, I'd go with a 5D IV. I don't believe Canon has a more robust, multi-use, kick-butt body in its lineup. But the R is a great companion for it during event shooting.

When I read the thread title, I thought, "Wow, that is a strange decision, as the two bodies are so disparate." After reading the thread, I feel exactly the same.


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 13, 2019)

Honestly I wasn't willing to read through your pros and cons in detail.

The reason therefore is that deciding between RP and 5DS is like apples and oranges.
Maybe it would be different if you would take the EOS R into account, too.
Two totally different tools, two totally different setups in size, ergonomics and quality.

Reading that you primarily shoot landscapes and portraits of your kids I'd go 1000% (yeah one zero too much) at the 5DS.
Pros:

Higher resolution for landscape
better ergonomics and OVF for moving objects (your kids, BIF).
generally more professional tool
much longer battery life

The RP has only those few pros that you might consider:

New system, new lenses (but also expensive), maybe Canon's future
size, weight, form factor
that's it IMO
If you're used to OVF and mirror go to a store and try the RP out.
I found the form factor great and I would buy it as travel body. But my 5D3 will stay main body as long as the EVF isn't at least two times faster or a 5D5 hits the shelves.

Edit: I tried the RP in a store and three tries of panning and the delay and smearing in the EVF made me put it away again really fast.
Not bad. But nothing for me.


----------



## jaell (Nov 13, 2019)

YuengLinger said:


> Sorry, confused, do you have lenses or don't you? You say you haven no access, but part of your "RP cons" is needing an adapter for all your lenses? Just trying to understand how much EF gear is involved in your decision process.
> 
> If you do have a substantial number of lenses, there is nothing wrong with staying with a dSLR. And there is nothing wrong with using the adapter (if you thought you could get by with the RP until finances and RF body options are more favorable), other than the time involved in putting the adapter on your lenses.
> 
> ...



Oh yeah, have all my lenses (EF mount; listed in my sig). So if I got the RP, I'd have to get the adapter (adding to cost, so there isn't as much of a price advantage) to use my EF lenses.

And yeah, I know the bodies are a lot different. Hence, why I'm asking. I know it's an apples-to-oranges comparison. What I'm looking for is someone who has used the RP and says "mirrorless is a game-changer!" or "ewwww, stay with the tried-and-true!"


----------



## jaell (Nov 13, 2019)

And specifically, it's $1179.99 for a grey-market 5Ds on eBay from a very reputable seller (last time I looked, it was $1279, so the price has come down), and from time to time eBay runs a 15% discount (I got my 135 f/2 L and an 1.4x III extender from Adorama via eBay on 15% discounts) that caps at $100, but has no tax or shipping, so I'd be looking at the 5Ds for $1079.99 total.

Or $999.99 for the RP, and another $99.99 for the mount adapter. So if I can time it right with eBay, I could get the 5Ds for $20 less than the RP & adapter.

Hmm... I think I just made my decision.


----------



## Dantana (Nov 13, 2019)

jaell said:


> And specifically, it's $1179.99 for a grey-market 5Ds on eBay from a very reputable seller (last time I looked, it was $1279, so the price has come down), and from time to time eBay runs a 15% discount (I got my 135 f/2 L and an 1.4x III extender from Adorama via eBay on 15% discounts) that caps at $100, but has no tax or shipping, so I'd be looking at the 5Ds for $1079.99 total.
> 
> Or $999.99 for the RP, and another $99.99 for the mount adapter. So if I can time it right with eBay, I could get the 5Ds for $20 less than the RP & adapter.
> 
> Hmm... I think I just made my decision.


Not to confuse the choice, but Adorama is throwing in the adapter with the RP at $999


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 13, 2019)

Wouldn’t a court grant you access to your 5DIV maybe every second weekend ?


----------



## navastronia (Nov 13, 2019)

Dantana said:


> Not to confuse the choice, but Adorama is throwing in the adapter with the RP at $999



And the extension grip, too. I ordered one two days ago.


----------



## PCM-madison (Nov 13, 2019)

I use a 5DS R and RP frequently. I am currently traveling and brought the RP. I see myself choosing the RP for travel or when I will be hiking more than 3 miles most of the time. For action sports and birding, the 5DS R is my choice unless it involves long hikes.


----------



## Act444 (Nov 14, 2019)

PCM-madison said:


> I use a 5DS R and RP frequently. I am currently traveling and brought the RP. I see myself choosing the RP for travel or when I will be hiking more than 3 miles most of the time. For action sports and birding, the 5DS R is my choice unless it involves long hikes.



I used both cameras at an event recently. They are very, very different beasts. The 5DSR was my main rig (wanted the high resolution) and when I desired the flexibility of the flip screen, I utilized the RP.

The decision is ultimately up to you (OP) but I think from what you described, I'd be more comfortable with the 5DS. Landscapes and portraits will particularly benefit from the extra pixels. But - if you lean more heavily towards travel, the RP *is* considerably smaller and lighter...just remember to bring the spare batteries!


----------



## Del Paso (Nov 14, 2019)

Since you shoot mostly landscapes, macro and the occasional birdie, and use , just like me, the 100-400 and, in future, a 14 mm, I wouldn't hesitate a second.
Get the 5 DSr, the RP is a fine little camera, but it's EVF, sensor and AF are no match for the 5 D. The mechanical quality of the 5 DSr is far higher too.
But if you had the EOS R in mind, and not the RP...


----------



## takesome1 (Nov 14, 2019)

AlanF said:


> You may not be prioritising bird photography but the 5DS + 100-400mm Is a killer combination for that. It will outperform the RP in AF and resolution by a country mile.


 You can seldom crop birds that are a country mile and get a decent picture, the 5DS just doesn't have that kind of resolution.

To the OP: The two bodies you are comparing are not even similar. I am waiting on high resolution mirrorless before I switch from my 5DSr


----------



## AlanF (Nov 14, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> You can seldom crop birds that are a country mile and get a decent picture, the 5DS just doesn't have that kind of resolution.
> 
> To the OP: The two bodies you are comparing are not even similar. I am waiting on high resolution mirrorless before I switch from my 5DSr


 "to outperform by a country mile" means "to outperform by far" - see https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/country-mile
Don't you use that expression in the USA?


----------



## SteveC (Nov 14, 2019)

AlanF said:


> "to outperform by a country mile" means "to outperform by far" - see https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/country-mile
> Don't you use that expression in the USA?



I've seen it here and there, but it's uncommon, maybe even an archaic expression here. (And the "here and there" I've seen it, might not have been US sources.)

In all earnest, I interpreted takesome1's comment as a joke, pretending to misunderstand the expression.


----------



## takesome1 (Nov 14, 2019)

AlanF said:


> "to outperform by a country mile" means "to outperform by far" - see https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/country-mile
> Don't you use that expression in the USA?



It is used in my part of the US, as SteveC commented it probably is archaic. I might hear my 88 year old father in law say it, but never my kids or grand kids.
With urbanization the phrase has slowly disappeared.
Most people use a City Mile now, or just "mile".

I wonder if those in Europe use the phrase "country kilometer".


----------



## AlanF (Nov 14, 2019)

SteveC said:


> I've seen it here and there, but it's uncommon, maybe even an archaic expression here. (And the "here and there" I've seen it, might not have been US sources.)
> 
> In all earnest, I interpreted takesome1's comment as a joke, pretending to misunderstand the expression.


I had considered that possibility, but our US members use smileys to show they are joking.


----------



## SteveC (Nov 14, 2019)

AlanF said:


> I had considered that possibility, but our US members use smileys to show they are joking.



I had no idea where he was from. When on the internet, I try to handle/detect/get irony a lot better than most people in the US do. (It's a UK specialty.)


----------



## takesome1 (Nov 14, 2019)

Well I thought the irony and ignorance demonstrated in my post was enough to convey a joke. I guess I have been watching to many old episodes of Green Acres. Here is the smiley so there is no question


----------



## AlanF (Nov 15, 2019)

takesome1 said:


> It is used in my part of the US, as SteveC commented it probably is archaic. I might hear my 88 year old father in law say it, but never my kids or grand kids.
> With urbanization the phrase has slowly disappeared.
> Most people use a City Mile now, or just "mile".
> 
> I wonder if those in Europe use the phrase "country kilometer".


In Europe (+Canada, Australia etc) we use kilometre.


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 15, 2019)

AlanF said:


> In Europe (+Canada, Australia etc) we use kilometre.


In Germany we spell it "Kilometer" 



takesome1 said:


> I wonder if those in Europe use the phrase "country kilometer".


A "Kilometer" is always a "Kilometer" is always 1000 Meter.
Up to the late 19th century there was a German "Landmeile" which was 7532,5 Meter, see here.


----------



## Valvebounce (Nov 15, 2019)

Hi Maximilian. 
Damn you my friend, that is five minutes I can’t get back and I now no more about Miles than I ever needed to know! 

Cheers, Graham. 



Maximilian said:


> In Germany we spell it "Kilometer"
> 
> 
> A "Kilometer" is always a "Kilometer" is always 1000 Meter.
> Up to the late 19th century there was a German "Landmeile" which was 7532,5 Meter, see here.


----------



## AlanF (Nov 15, 2019)

Kilometres were invented by the French, and we defer to them.


----------



## takesome1 (Nov 15, 2019)

So it would be a "Country Kilometre" in France.

Interestingly though, spell check is telling me the French have Kilometer wrong.


----------

