# Review: Canon EOS R6 by DPReview



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 17, 2020)

> A couple of my favourite reviewers have finished their review of the Canon EOS R6. Both Chris and Jordan came away quite impressed by the new mirrorless offering from Canon.
> *From DPReview:*
> The EOS R6 promises to be the full-frame mirrorless camera from Canon that many have been waiting for. We put it through the wringer to find out. Filmed on a pre-production Canon EOS R5. See full resolution sample photos from this episode here.
> *Preorder the Canon EOS R6*
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## padam (Jul 17, 2020)

It seems that they couldn't find any major issues, only nitpicks.
A complete opposite to their EOS R review, although the MSRP on this camera is only 200$ more than the EOS R, which started at 2300$.


----------



## Cat_Interceptor (Jul 17, 2020)

So to summarise - 

The R6 is just as good as the specs suggest and the footage from the pre-productin R5 is WHOOOOOOOOOAh good. And the IBIS is Olympus level on a FF


----------



## Dj 7th (Jul 17, 2020)

To be sincere, I am a little surprised that they spent so much time talking about how good the R6 is. DP review don't normally flatter Canon cameras bur this time they did. They must have been extra-ordinarily impressed.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

Dj 7th said:


> To be sincere, I am a little surprised that they spent so much time talking about how good the R6 is. DP review don't normally flatter Canon cameras bur this time they did. They must have been extra-ordinarily impressed.




Reviewers always pull for the 'porridge is just right', 'best stuff of a top end body in a competitive price' sort of rig. Folks gushed over the D750 and A7 III this way.

I am expecting the R5 to get a much tougher working over. They could build the case that Canon has really launched _*two*_ R6 bodies -- it's just that one comes with 45 MP/8K upgrade inside for a $1400 upcharge, and that the upcharge/functionality isn't truly needed.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

Dj 7th said:


> To be sincere, I am a little surprised that they spent so much time talking about how good the R6 is. DP review don't normally flatter Canon cameras bur this time they did. They must have been extra-ordinarily impressed.




And I'm not surprised at all. What have reviewers always said about Canon bodies since the 5D3 dropped?

Bang for buck is not there
It's not a pro camera with a single card slot
Dynamic range lacking
Canon nerfs throughout the feature set
Technology! Where the hell is IBIS, Eye AF, etc.
And the R6 said 'Well here you go.' 

- A


----------



## padam (Jul 17, 2020)

I think one clarification is missing from Canon: how well does the IBIS work with EF lenses? (or fully manual lenses, but let's not go into that, they want to sell Canon lenses primarily)

They have given stabilisation ratings for all the RF lenses (the f/11 DO RF-mount primes *will not work* in conjunction with IBIS due to technical reasons, so only providing 5 or 4 stops in lens stabilisation)
Will they provide the same data for their EF lenses?


----------



## bandido (Jul 17, 2020)

Dj 7th said:


> To be sincere, I am a little surprised that they spent so much time talking about how good the R6 is. DP review don't normally flatter Canon cameras bur this time they did. They must have been extra-ordinarily impressed.


That is because it was Chris and Jordan. I can always count on them for an unbiased review.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 17, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Reviewers always pull for the 'porridge is just right', 'best stuff of a top end body in a competitive price' sort of rig. Folks gushed over the D750 and A7 III this way.


DPR doesn't. This really is a _way_ out-of-character Canon review for DPR.


----------



## Andy Westwood (Jul 17, 2020)

Chris and Jordan now at DP Review are fantastic reviewers, I love that video footage taken with the R5 and a great review from the R6 they couldn’t find much they didn’t like about that camera apposed to much they really like, looks like Canon have this one right


----------



## Dj 7th (Jul 17, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Reviewers always pull for the 'porridge is just right', 'best stuff of a top end body in a competitive price' sort of rig. Folks gushed over the D750 and A7 III this way.
> 
> I am expecting the R5 to get a much tougher working over. They could build the case that Canon has really launched _*two*_ R6 bodies -- it's just that one comes with 45 MP/8K upgrade inside for a $1400 upcharge, and that the upcharge/functionality isn't truly needed.
> 
> - A



Great points you have there, I guess that is why it was difficult deciding which one to go with. I however decided to go with the R5 despite the price increase because I want a more durable body and the higher megapixel count. I also want the 8K, so that I can create still grabs from hard to catch situations.


----------



## Atlasman (Jul 17, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Reviewers always pull for the 'porridge is just right', 'best stuff of a top end body in a competitive price' sort of rig. Folks gushed over the D750 and A7 III this way.
> 
> I am expecting the R5 to get a much tougher working over. They could build the case that Canon has really launched _*two*_ R6 bodies -- it's just that one comes with 45 MP/8K upgrade inside for a $1400 upcharge, and that the upcharge/functionality isn't truly needed.
> 
> - A


In my view, the R5 is the ultimate hybrid camera to this point in time—which includes the to-be-released Sony A7SIII. The R5 has compelling video formats (4K DCI 120fps 10-bit) a 45mp sensor, outstanding IBIS, great ergonomics and class leading AF. The R6 is NOT an R5!


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 17, 2020)

Is it me or is the review video rather blurry? Granted it's using a pre-production R5 but still....


----------



## Jstnelson (Jul 17, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Is it me or is the review video rather blurry? Granted it's using a pre-production R5 but still....


It looks sharp as can be on my 4K monitor


----------



## HikeBike (Jul 17, 2020)

I always enjoy watching these guys. Glad their experiences with the R6 were positive.


----------



## HikeBike (Jul 17, 2020)

padam said:


> I think one clarification is missing from Canon: how well does the IBIS work with EF lenses? (or fully manual lenses, but let's not go into that, they want to sell Canon lenses primarily)
> 
> They have given stabilisation ratings for all the RF lenses (the f/11 DO RF-mount primes *will not work* in conjunction with IBIS due to technical reasons, so only providing 5 or 4 stops in lens stabilisation)
> Will they provide the same data for their EF lenses?


Agreed! I'm anxious to know what to expect from my EF lenses...most of which do not have IS. I'm sure they'll publish this information at some point, but I'd like it sooner than later.


----------



## Atlasman (Jul 17, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Is it me or is the review video rather blurry? Granted it's using a pre-production R5 but still....


It's you! I watched on my iPad and the colours, detail and saturation were spot on!


----------



## amorse (Jul 17, 2020)

Well, now I'm good and warmed up for a new R5 review. As someone who doesn't usually really notice subtle video quality differences, the video quality on that certainly seemed to stand out to me.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 17, 2020)

Interesting that the R5 is shipping in 2 weeks while the R6 much later (end of August in UK), yet they have only a pre-production copy of the R5.


----------



## Andy Westwood (Jul 17, 2020)

Video quality looks stunning to me


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> DPR doesn't. This really is a _way_ out-of-character Canon review for DPR.




I don't think they are nearly as biased as we Canonites believe. 

They simply prioritize certain things that Canon has been conservative about supporting. They are nuts about high spec-per-dollar / 'other companies offer X at this price point' and great base ISO DR, which are two things Canon heretofore didn't deliver compared to the competition.

I'm not giving them a total pass, but they're not like DXO or something. And Chris and Jordan are money. They are not lab techs or folks pushing an agenda. They shoot and tell you how they feel. I'm here for that.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

Dj 7th said:


> Great points you have there, I guess that is why it was difficult deciding which one to go with. I however decided to go with the R5 despite the price increase because I want a more durable body and the higher megapixel count. I also want the 8K, so that I can create still grabs from hard to catch situations.




I'm with you. My now pensionable 5D3 is highly likely to finally be retired for the R5. We're just not traveling anytime soon  , so I may save my money and get one next year when the price comes down a bit.

I certainly have the funds to get it right now, but I'd overwhelmingly just be shooting the family and flowers in the yard, you know? 

- A


----------



## Besisika (Jul 17, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Is it me or is the review video rather blurry? Granted it's using a pre-production R5 but still....


I think it is just you. On my 4K display it looks fantastic. I could be wrong. 
Comparing it to 1DX II, I am getting good looking footage. I will be happy to pair both together.


----------



## melgross (Jul 17, 2020)

DPReview has given many Canon products very good reviews. Those who nitpick their reviews and damn the entire review for justified mentioning of less than great features or performance aren’t really paying attention to the entire review.

this review, for example, only found one thing that could be a problem, short battery life, and a second, which isn’t a problem, but might cause some to not want the camera—resolution. Both are legitimate concerns to some people. But as he said, carry another battery. I alway carry extra batteries, and have never considered that to be an issue. But I do know those who refuse to. Not pros though. I suppose it’s like those who protest against wearing masks now. They somehow think it abridges their freedom, when it’s only common sense.


----------



## mccasi (Jul 17, 2020)

Definitely fantastic review. Let's see the bias from "three blind man and an elephant".

R5 vs. R6 is raised in the video, R5 allows me to do completely new use cases though:
- no PC workflow with 5ghz image.canon upload
- 8K raw video entirely for computational photography: i've successfully done focus stacking from 4k all-i video with manual focus pull, but 8k Raw, 100-200 images - mouth-watering
- also i'll definitely need more MPs, as I want to crop from my now 8 stops IBISed 28-70mm F2 - that thing will stay on the R5 90% of the time


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 17, 2020)

Cat_Interceptor said:


> So to summarise -
> 
> The R6 is just as good as the specs suggest and the footage from the pre-productin R5 is WHOOOOOOOOOAh good. And the IBIS is Olympus level on a FF



The video looked really nice. I’m super curious what mode(s) they used. If that’s the binned 4K footage for instance than the whole heat thing is a non-issue until you get to HFR.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 17, 2020)

padam said:


> I think one clarification is missing from Canon: how well does the IBIS work with EF lenses?



It was somewhere, but I don't remember where exactly. Basically the IBIS will work with IS in EF lenses, but it won't be 'coordinated', so not as good as with RF lenses with IS.


----------



## mariosk1gr (Jul 17, 2020)

This a new to me really expecially from Chris. He was always negative about Canon cameras. Now with the last review of R6 I see a much more honest approach of him about the camera. That's great because I expect honesty as a viewer when I watch a review of a camera brand and not fanboy-ism that many youtubers are cause of different reasons behind! At least they got a sub back.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 17, 2020)

I watched this, but it still feels very much like a preview. I want to see inside the viewfinder and get at look at the AF performance. I want to see images out of the camera. I do not care one little bit how they perform in video.


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jul 17, 2020)

R5 video looks like a spec war ender.


----------



## mccasi (Jul 17, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I watched this, but it still feels very much like a preview. I want to see inside the viewfinder and get at look at the AF performance. I want to see images out of the camera. I do not care one little bit how they perform in video.


AF performance is terribly boring, just watch Jared Polin using the 1Dx3 as mirrorless, then you know .. it’s 95% as good as Sony a9ii


----------



## mccasi (Jul 17, 2020)

highdesertmesa said:


> R5 video looks like a spec war ender.


Basically a Panasonic s1h:
- Minus active cooling
+ best in class video AF vs none
+ Plus weather sealing
+ weight & size
+ lenses


----------



## IcyBergs (Jul 17, 2020)

Dj 7th said:


> To be sincere, I am a little surprised that they spent so much time talking about how good the R6 is. DP review don't normally flatter Canon cameras bur this time they did. They must have been extra-ordinarily impressed.



Or perhaps with the news about Olympus going under they need to capture more Canon fans attention.

Self-preservation is a powerful thing.


----------



## raptor3x (Jul 17, 2020)

mccasi said:


> Basically a Panasonic s1h:
> - Minus active cooling
> + best in class video AF vs none
> + Plus weather sealing
> ...



It will be interesting to see if we get something like an R5C with active cooling and no recording time limits or if that's saved for a new RF series cinema body.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Jul 17, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> Is it me or is the review video rather blurry? Granted it's using a pre-production R5 but still....


You probably didn't have it set to the correct resolution or something, this looked incredible.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 17, 2020)

mccasi said:


> AF performance is terribly boring, just watch Jared Polin using the 1Dx3 as mirrorless, then you know .. it’s 95% as good as Sony a9ii



AF performance is the most important thing for me. Like are these new cameras up to the level of a DSLR yet or do they still struggle. There wasn't even talk of the EVF speed and latency, does it get you close enough to a OVF now that it is worth trying to track an animal and you are no longer a 3rd of a second behind.


----------



## raptor3x (Jul 17, 2020)

IcyBergs said:


> Or perhaps with the news about Olympus going under they need to capture more Canon fans attention.
> 
> Self-preservation is a powerful thing.



Considering that outside of Japan Olympus' market share is an order of magnitude less than Canon or Sony I doubt they're making any decisions based on what's going on at Olympus.


----------



## Joules (Jul 17, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> AF performance is the most important thing for me. Like are these new cameras up to the level of a DSLR yet or do they still struggle. There wasn't even talk of the EVF speed and latency, does it get you close enough to a OVF now that it is worth trying to track an animal and you are no longer a 3rd of a second behind.


Well, it was said that they preferred to use the LiveView on the 1DX III due to superior AF and that AF on the R6 matches or exceeds what they valued about it in the 1DX III right?


----------



## bandido (Jul 17, 2020)

Dj 7th said:


> Great points you have there, I guess that is why it was difficult deciding which one to go with. I however decided to go with the R5 despite the price increase because I want a more durable body and the higher megapixel count. I also want the 8K, so that I can create still grabs from hard to catch situations.


I remember reading that durability was supposed to be better on the R5 but everything indicate that it is similar on both. Which is a good thing.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 17, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> and that the upcharge/functionality isn't truly needed.




What do you mean when you say 'functionality isn't truly needed"?


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 17, 2020)

Dj 7th said:


> Great points you have there, I guess that is why it was difficult deciding which one to go with. I however decided to go with the R5 despite the price increase because I want a more durable body and the higher megapixel count. I also want the 8K, so that I can create still grabs from hard to catch situations.




Yep.. If Canon had chosen t go with a higher megapixel sensor in the R6 I'd be there, but 20MP isn't going to do it for me.


----------



## mccasi (Jul 17, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> AF performance is the most important thing for me. Like are these new cameras up to the level of a DSLR yet or do they still struggle. There wasn't even talk of the EVF speed and latency, does it get you close enough to a OVF now that it is worth trying to track an animal and you are no longer a 3rd of a second behind.


Man, the Pinnacle of DSLR AF is the 1Dx3.. and that doesn’t do half as low light, half as accurate for face and half the image cycle... plus micro adjustments as the image sensor and pdaf are often misaligned... DSLR AF sucks hard compared to z6, eos R, a7iii, maybe barely outperforms a Panasonic s1... 
for lag, watch Tony northrups videos, if you chase birds in flight A9 was meh, 120hz should help a ton, but at High battery life cost, ... then again no bird eye af in the DSLR desert


----------



## AEWest (Jul 17, 2020)

IcyBergs said:


> Or perhaps with the news about Olympus going under they need to capture more Canon fans attention.
> 
> Self-preservation is a powerful thing.


I think that if they are concerned about impact of Olympus demise on their site usage, they have serious problems.


----------



## DBounce (Jul 17, 2020)

I watched it a couple times just to see the R5 footage... which looks amazing to my eyes. I’m very happy I got my preorder in early. Can’t wait to get my hands on this puppy.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 17, 2020)

melgross said:


> DPReview has given many Canon products very good reviews. Those who nitpick their reviews and damn the entire review for justified mentioning of less than great features or performance aren’t really paying attention to the entire review.


They have also told blatant lies, and provided "opinions" that bear no semblance to the reality of what they're pontificating about, often based on presumptions about how in their view a thing _should _work, rather than on how the manual says they _do _work.

Misunderstood victims they are not.


----------



## Go Wild (Jul 17, 2020)

Video quality from pre-production EOS R5 - Stunning!!
Vídeo quality from production EOS R6 - Stunning!!
Still Image quality from EOS R6 - Stunning!!

What´s NOT TO LIKE from these 2 beast!!! Keep going haters!!  Can´t wait to put my hands on both!! Looking sooo forward to test 4k120fps from R5 and stills from both of the cameras!! Looking promising!


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 17, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Video quality from pre-production EOS R5 - Stunning!!


It didn't burst into flames, either - so that's good...


----------



## padam (Jul 17, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It was somewhere, but I don't remember where exactly. Basically the IBIS will work with IS in EF lenses, but it won't be 'coordinated', so not as good as with RF lenses with IS.


Yeah, but at least they should clarify what that roughly means, extra +1 stop? etc.
The RF 28-70mm f/2L and RF 85mm f/1.2L are claimed to be 8-stops even without any IS in the lens (the lenses do have a gyro sensor, which will communicate with the camera's gyro sensor, therefore making the IBIS even more effective)


----------



## AlanF (Jul 17, 2020)

Joules said:


> Well, it was said that they preferred to use the LiveView on the 1DX III due to superior AF and that AF on the R6 matches or exceeds what they valued about it in the 1DX III right?


No, not really right. I watched it before your post and further twice afterwards to check. He said the liveview of the 1DXIII was better than with the mirror and the R6 has features of the LV like eye detection they valued etc. He didn't say that the AF matched or exceeded that of the 1DXIII. He ended with that the AF is knocking on the door of the Sony gold standard. If it is knocking on the door of the A9, then that would be really impressive. If it's the A7RIV or AIII, then it isn't impressive. The AF section of the review was too sketchy to draw real conclusions.


----------



## sanj (Jul 17, 2020)

Atlasman said:


> It's you! I watched on my iPad and the colours, detail and saturation were spot on!


Me too. It was not sharp. I think it is because of my bad wifi.


----------



## sanj (Jul 17, 2020)

Atlasman said:


> It's you! I watched on my iPad and the colours, detail and saturation were spot on!


Me too. It was not sharp. I think it is because of my bad wifi.


----------



## Lenscracker (Jul 17, 2020)

padam said:


> I think one clarification is missing from Canon: how well does the IBIS work with EF lenses? (or fully manual lenses, but let's not go into that, they want to sell Canon lenses primarily)
> 
> Will they provide the same data for their EF lenses?



There are also some RF lenses that do not have IS installed in them. The 28-70 F/2.0 is one of them. I am considering a purchase but I want to know how much the IBIS alone will help to steady it.


----------



## padam (Jul 17, 2020)

Lenscracker said:


> There are also some RF lenses that do not have IS installed in them. The 28-70 F/2.0 is one of them. I am considering a purchase but I want to know how much the IBIS alone will help to steady it.


It is rated at the maximum of 8 stops (Actually better than some other lenses with IS)

You can see the table they provided about RF lenses here.
https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r6-initial-review/2


----------



## cornieleous (Jul 17, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> They could build the case that Canon has really launched _*two*_ R6 bodies -- it's just that one comes with 45 MP/8K upgrade inside for a $1400 upcharge, and that the upcharge/functionality isn't truly needed.
> 
> - A



I don't agree that these cameras are different only in resolution for $1400 or that they are both an R6 with only one major feature difference (resolution). I would agree the $1400 might be slightly much for all that you do get, but it is not just resolution on the list.

Just talking resolution, when it is needed, 45 vs. 20 MP allows over a third of the frame to be cropped in either dimension and have the same quality, or it can be down sampled uncropped to eliminate noise. It also allows for larger prints, and I did see my large print quality improve when I went from 20-30MP as it obviously should. I could never go back to my 6D @ 20 MP for many types of shooting I do (timelapse, astro photography, severe weather, landscape) without a significant loss in quality and post processing options. For some people, 20MP might be fine as it was for me for many years, but I push right to the edge of even the 5D4 capabilities currently at 30MP, and that extra 1/4 of cropping I can do is used all the time. 45MP will be even better.

If you consider all the difference between these cameras, the $1400 starts to make more sense and they appear very similarly priced and spec'd to the mirrorless updated equivalents of the 5D4 and 6D:

8K (debatable how many of us will actually use it)
4K DCI vs UHD (essential if that is your project format)
+25 MP (significant for many types of photo and video work, and if you need it, you need it.)
Better weather sealing
Better LPF
Higher resolution viewfinder
Larger rear screen (slightly) with higher resolution
Faster Wifi and newer bluetooth.
For 4K video the R5 is full frame vs. a slight crop on the R6 (not a big deal).
Top screen (RF control ring might make this less needed but still nice to have)
Several more video modes such as shutter and aperture priority 
More resolutions and codecs
3 pin remote shutter release port vs 2.5mm
Nearly all metal vs part plastic body
Dual pixel raw (it isn't that amazing in the past, but some new features and DSP are promising)
R5 ships earlier 
For myself, its a bit much and obviously marketing separation, but when considering my needs the 1400 seems worth it in the end and it is hard to regard these as simply two R6 with one having more resolution. I shoot in bad weather, I push resolution, and the better EVF and screen will be welcome for someone used to non articulating DSLR (5D4 and 6D).


----------



## scyrene (Jul 17, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I'm with you. My now pensionable 5D3 is highly likely to finally be retired for the R5. We're just not traveling anytime soon  , so I may save my money and get one next year when the price comes down a bit.
> 
> I certainly have the funds to get it right now, but I'd overwhelmingly just be shooting the family and flowers in the yard, you know?



I don't normally advocate for early adoption but two points to consider: you may have more budget now for gear if you're unable to travel; and if you get it sooner rather than later, you'll be comfortable with all its features, foibles, and limitations by the time you go somewhere.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> AF performance is the most important thing for me. Like are these new cameras up to the level of a DSLR yet or do they still struggle. There wasn't even talk of the EVF speed and latency, does it get you close enough to a OVF now that it is worth trying to track an animal and you are no longer a 3rd of a second behind.




Umm, Chris went into the 120Hz EVF and latency figures were quoted if I recall. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> What do you mean when you say 'functionality isn't truly needed"?




I'm saying they could argue that the R5 upcharge isn't worth paying, and that the R6 is probably the best camera for most of us.

No one's invalidating anyone's needs -- if you need 45 MP or the top end video, get the R5 of course.

Perhaps making my prior assertion another way: when you used to jump from 6-series to the 5-series, 5-series to 1-series, etc. you roundly got better stuff across the board -- better build, exclusive features, etc. One notch faster sync, that second card slot, on-chip ADC, full VF coverage, a few extra MP, a few extra FPS, etc. you get the idea.

But with the R5 and R6, as much as the sensor res + what video you can capture with it is a very big deal, *the R6 in no uncertain terms got hooked up with the good stuff here*. The nerf gun stayed home for this mid-tier camera. R6 gets _almost _everything the R5 gets other than the sensor itself and the video it can pull down.

So when the 'lower' of the two cameras takes on (candidly) a Sony or Nikon price-tiering argument in which you can get ALL the good stuff except resolution, it's a lot easier to attack the pricier camera's value proposition. I expect DPR (Chris, especially on stills) to raise that question.

Or the corollary: Canon would have sold more R5 bdoies if they artfully nerfed the R6, and it would have p----- us off like it always does. Thankfully, they didn't do that. 

- A


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 17, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> I don't agree that these cameras are different only in resolution for $1400 or that they are both an R6 with only one major feature difference (resolution). I would agree the $1400 might be slightly much for all that you do get, but it is not just resolution on the list.
> 
> Just talking resolution, when it is needed, 45 vs. 20 MP allows over a third of the frame to be cropped in either dimension and have the same quality, or it can be down sampled uncropped to eliminate noise. It also allows for larger prints, and I did see my large print quality improve when I went from 20-30MP as it obviously should. I could never go back to my 6D @ 20 MP for many types of shooting I do (timelapse, astro photography, severe weather, landscape) without a significant loss in quality and post processing options. For some people, 20MP might be fine as it was for me for many years, but I push right to the edge of even the 5D4 capabilities currently at 30MP, and that extra 1/4 of cropping I can do is used all the time. 45MP will be even better.
> 
> ...




Perfect post - one more thing - it only costs about the same as the 5D4 did when it was introduced. It's a bargain.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 17, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> The video looked really nice. I’m super curious what mode(s) they used. If that’s the binned 4K footage for instance than the whole heat thing is a non-issue until you get to HFR.



Answering my own question: On twitter Jordan mentioned that it's the "standard, non-supersampled 4K" mode. I'm impressed. Renders the "overheats at 30p" argument much less relevant.

Edit: He says he used both modes depending on shot. Can't wait for the full review(s). Both these cameras look quite wonderful.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1284115295892680709


----------



## TMHKR (Jul 17, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It was somewhere, but I don't remember where exactly. Basically the IBIS will work with IS in EF lenses, but it won't be 'coordinated', so not as good as with RF lenses with IS.


Rudy Winston from Canon USA said it in an interview. With RF lenses, the IBIS will probably be a bit more responsive, since the RF mount has higher data speed.
He also said that the stabilization function in general can be either "on" or "off" - you can't for example have lens IS on and IBIS off. Both of them are either on, or off.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> If you consider all the difference between these cameras, the $1400 starts to make more sense and they appear very similarly priced and spec'd to the mirrorless updated equivalents of the 5D4 and 6D:
> 
> [long list]




Sure, but the big, beefy horsepower specs and major feature adds are all here:
​DPAF II​1DX3 sensor (i.e. outdated handmedown off-chip 5D3/6D1 sensor tech no more for this price point)​IBIS​12 / 20 fps​Huge buffer​Eye AF for all sorts of creatures​Two slots​Joystick​Thumbwheel​
Or put another way, put the R6 sensor in the R5 and take away the 8K and nicer 4K features. _Would you sell that camera alongside the R6? _I'm not sure I would. That sensor is the beating heart of the $3899 value proposition.

There are all sorts of differences between cameras, but the features that get people pulling out their credit cards are largely available on both bodies. The R6 got hooked up. I still contend the R5 is largely asking +$1400 for a better sensor and the expanded video it can bring down.

- A


----------



## BakaBokeh (Jul 17, 2020)

That R5 footage is amazing. Kept yelling, "Look at that dynamic range!" as I was pointing at my screen.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2020)

bandido said:


> That is because it was Chris and Jordan. I can always count on them for an unbiased review.



I've disagreed with them in some reviews, but they are very good reviewers overall.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2020)

Keep in mind while watching the video that they said they were hand holding the R5 all day to test the IBIS. To me that footage looked 90-95% as good as footage on a gimbal.


----------



## dtaylor (Jul 17, 2020)

BakaBokeh said:


> That R5 footage is amazing. Kept yelling, "Look at that dynamic range!" as I was pointing at my screen.



You noticed that scene too?


----------



## Bob Howland (Jul 17, 2020)

sanj said:


> Me too. It was not sharp. I think it is because of my bad wifi.


I think I had your problem. It was a lot sharper on my desktop computer with the hard wire connection to the cable modem than on a laptop using Wifi. It's looking like I'll be buying both an R5 and R6, probably using the R6 more. I really want to see the files from both cameras at high ISO, starting with 6400.


----------



## Kiton (Jul 17, 2020)

All that matters to me now is, does the R5 band on silent shutter in LED??!!

If they have dealt with the banding, or at least dealt with the majority of banding, Sony is in deep dog doo.
The only great aspect of the A9 was the lack of banding in LED situations.

Please Canon, don't screw this up!!


----------



## Billybob (Jul 17, 2020)

I can't help but chuckle at the number of comments asserting that finally a DPR review is fair to Canon. They're amazed that Chris and Jordan have finally shed DPR's anti-Canon bias and given a Canon product a fair trial. Some of these same comments assert that it won't last and the R5 will get the same old biased treatment. 

Most seemed oblivious to the possibility that DPR hasn't changed, rather it is Canon that changed. I was an avid Canon users for years. I anxiously waited for the release of the 6D II with tremendous anticipation but was sorely disappointed when it was actually inferior to its predecessor in several respects. I considered the 5D IV, but it was more money than I wanted to spend on a camera especially one that, to me, didn't seem significantly better than the M III that it replaced. I bought a 80D hoping to keep a foot in the Canon water, but there was nothing exciting about that camera. And I don't even want to talk about the Rebel releases. How many variations on a single theme can a company trot through without making any discernible progress forward?

Thus, to me, Canon has been in a huge rut for years. Rather than biased against Canon, I saw the DPR treatment almost as a form of "tough love". We love you Canon, we know you can do so much better than you're doing, so why aren't you living up to your potential?

Now, Canon seems to have gotten the message, Maybe they were planning this tour-de-force for years--and just weren't ready when they introduced the R but knew they had to release something. It kind of reminds me of the original GodFather movie, where the Corleone family looks like they’re fatally weakened and are just waiting to be wiped out by competing families. Instead, in the penultimate scene, Canon, I mean the Corleones, turn the table and whack all the rivals in a single carefully choreographed, coordinated attack. 

This is what the R5/6 offerings represent. Sure, video gets the headlines, but it’s the camera features and capabilities that will dominate the market. Incredible resolution (the A7R IV’s 61MP is of no consequence; I have to check the file size or EXIF data to distinguish R III and R IV images), competitive DR, AF and continuous rate that challenges the best sports cameras, state-of-the-art FF IBIS, and amazing ergonomics in a small package. And no doubt I left out several features including truly excellent video.

Hence, the question isn’t why has DPR suddenly given a fair review of a Canon product. No, the reviews have always fair. Rather, given the different between the R5/6 offerings and recent Canon offerings, the real question is why weren’t they even more critical of Canon’s half-hearted efforts?


----------



## sanj (Jul 17, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> I think I had your problem. It was a lot sharper on my desktop computer with the hard wire connection to the cable modem than on a laptop using Wifi. It's looking like I'll be buying both an R5 and R6, probably using the R6 more. I really want to see the files from both cameras at high ISO, starting with 6400.


Yep. It is sharp.  And nice.


----------



## sanj (Jul 17, 2020)

Bob Howland said:


> I think I had your problem. It was a lot sharper on my desktop computer with the hard wire connection to the cable modem than on a laptop using Wifi. It's looking like I'll be buying both an R5 and R6, probably using the R6 more. I really want to see the files from both cameras at high ISO, starting with 6400.


Yep. It is sharp.  And nice. 


Bob Howland said:


> I think I had your problem. It was a lot sharper on my desktop computer with the hard wire connection to the cable modem than on a laptop using Wifi. It's looking like I'll be buying both an R5 and R6, probably using the R6 more. I really want to see the files from both cameras at high ISO, starting with 6400.


Bob. Would you be kind enough to inbox me or email me [email protected] your findings when you compare the high ISO between the 2 cameras? I will be really really grateful. I will wait to buy as my kind of work is at standstill currently. THANK YOU.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 17, 2020)

Here is an R5 hands on review. Well, sort of a review of using the camera shooting models.


----------



## Del Paso (Jul 17, 2020)

Billybob said:


> I can't help but chuckle at the number of comments asserting that finally a DPR review is fair to Canon. They're amazed that Chris and Jordan have finally shed DPR's anti-Canon bias and given a Canon product a fair trial. Some of these same comments assert that it won't last and the R5 will get the same old biased treatment.
> 
> Most seemed oblivious to the possibility that DPR hasn't changed, rather it is Canon that changed. I was an avid Canon users for years. I anxiously waited for the release of the 6D II with tremendous anticipation but was sorely disappointed when it was actually inferior to its predecessor in several respects. I considered the 5D IV, but it was more money than I wanted to spend on a camera especially one that, to me, didn't seem significantly better than the M III that it replaced. I bought a 80D hoping to keep a foot in the Canon water, but there was nothing exciting about that camera. And I don't even want to talk about the Rebel releases. How many variations on a single theme can a company trot through without making any discernible progress forward?
> 
> ...


Sorry to disagree, but the 5 D IV is significantly better than the 5 D III (DR, MP, touchscreen etc...)
It wasn't an upgrade, but a new and better camera (I'm using both).


----------



## AlanF (Jul 17, 2020)

Billybob said:


> .... It kind of reminds me of the original GodFather movie, where the Corleone family looks like they’re fatally weakened and are just waiting to be wiped out by competing families. Instead, in the penultimate scene, Canon, I mean the Corleones, turn the table and whack all the rivals in a single carefully choreographed, coordinated attack.....


So, now we know: Canon is run by the Yakuza.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

Del Paso said:


> Sorry to disagree, but the 5 D IV is significantly better than the 5 D III (DR, MP, touchscreen etc...)
> It wasn't an upgrade, but a new and better camera (I'm using both).




Agree with you personally, but it depends on what you wanted. If you wanted a big bump to framerate, if you wanted a tilty-flippy, if you wanted spot metering at the AF point like the 1-series, the 5D4 didn't deliver that.

Some folks literally moved downmarket from their 5D3 to a 6D2 just so they could get a tilty-flippy. Everyone's priorities vary.

- A


----------



## fentiger (Jul 17, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Agree with you personally, but it depends on what you wanted. If you wanted a big bump to framerate, if you wanted a tilty-flippy, if you wanted spot metering at the AF point like the 1-series, the 5D4 didn't deliver that.
> 
> Some folks literally moved downmarket from their 5D3 to a 6D2 just so they could get a tilty-flippy. Everyone's priorities vary.
> 
> - A


would people move downmarket from a 1DX2 to R5?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 17, 2020)

People can gripe about these cameras but I'm tickled pink. It will be interesting to see what the R5 does to my 1DX2 usage.

Edit: Posted just before seeing the above comment. Good question. I think it all depends on how much I value some of the 1 series only features and perhaps the 4K60 with no heating issues but the weight ... I don't need and the size ... I might find I like more rather than less??

Jack


----------



## Isaacheus (Jul 17, 2020)

fentiger said:


> would people move downmarket from a 1DX2 to R5?



I can definitely imagine cases where people have used a 1dx2 for the higher video specs than the 5dmk4, who would be keen on a smaller, more capable rig in the R5. I know at least one person who has a 1dx2 for the 4k 60 - the r5 is probably a better option for them by far


----------



## kafala (Jul 17, 2020)

The R6 does not record video to both card slots simultaneously and there's no video recording in aperture mode. Plus it does not have ALL-I mode for video recording. I will stick with my Z6 for now.


----------



## Isaacheus (Jul 17, 2020)

Billybob said:


> I can't help but chuckle at the number of comments asserting that finally a DPR review is fair to Canon. They're amazed that Chris and Jordan have finally shed DPR's anti-Canon bias and given a Canon product a fair trial. Some of these same comments assert that it won't last and the R5 will get the same old biased treatment.
> 
> Most seemed oblivious to the possibility that DPR hasn't changed, rather it is Canon that changed. I was an avid Canon users for years. I anxiously waited for the release of the 6D II with tremendous anticipation but was sorely disappointed when it was actually inferior to its predecessor in several respects. I considered the 5D IV, but it was more money than I wanted to spend on a camera especially one that, to me, didn't seem significantly better than the M III that it replaced. I bought a 80D hoping to keep a foot in the Canon water, but there was nothing exciting about that camera. And I don't even want to talk about the Rebel releases. How many variations on a single theme can a company trot through without making any discernible progress forward?
> 
> ...



I was in the same boat with the 6dmk2 also also looked at the 5dmk4 at the time but ended up in the Sony camp as there were a number of features that I wanted at the time. 

Canon seem to have really pulled themselves out of the rut where they made decent cameras but with some noticeable compromises to cameras where, while maybe not perfect, everyone is going to use them as the benchmark again 

I'm likely to stay in the Sony camp currently, but these put Canon firmly back on the radar as viable options when I feel I need to upgrade (it's just those lenses now)


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 17, 2020)

Billybob said:


> Hence, the question isn’t why has DPR suddenly given a fair review of a Canon product. No, the reviews have always fair. Rather, given the different between the R5/6 offerings and recent Canon offerings, the real question is why weren’t they even more critical of Canon’s half-hearted efforts?


That's simply, demonstrably untrue - DPR has habitually criticised things in Canon cameras that they've given no mind to when they've reviewed other manufacturers' cameras with similar issues.

Specifically, they've reviewed Canon cameras in such a way as to present them at their worst - what they _can't _do - rather than crediting them for what they do well. Regardless of what else a given Canon might bring to the table, DPR would always downplay its qualities by making greater play of what (in _their_ _opinion_) was an issue, whether or not it was a Real World failing.

Most typically, they'd frequently weight their overall opinion of a Canon camera towards the negative, simply because of the good old (and to most people, borderline irrelevant) sensor dynamic range stick-to-beat-Canon-with. A camera might excel in pretty much every regard, but DPR would invariably dismiss those qualities by dwelling on Canon's supposedly inferior sensors.

Time and time again. A complete lack of objective balance, and a focus on what DPR _subjectively _thought was most important, to the exclusion of whatever the camera did well..

There's nothing "half hearted" about a camera that does everything very well, and Canon cameras invariably do. Bells and whistles rarely make for a better _camera_, and being impressed by shiny shiny while ignoring solid, worthwhile Real World performance, does not make for a good, fair, objective review.


----------



## cornieleous (Jul 17, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Sure, but the big, beefy horsepower specs and major feature adds are all here:
> ​DPAF II​1DX3 sensor (i.e. outdated handmedown off-chip 5D3/6D1 sensor tech no more for this price point)​IBIS​12 / 20 fps​Huge buffer​Eye AF for all sorts of creatures​Two slots​Joystick​Thumbwheel​
> Or put another way, put the R6 sensor in the R5 and take away the 8K and nicer 4K features. _Would you sell that camera alongside the R6? _I'm not sure I would. That sensor is the beating heart of the $3899 value proposition.
> 
> ...



I see where you are coming from and you do have a point that the R6 was given an honest upgrade with good technology and even edges the R5 in a couple areas- the 6D did much the same to the 5D3 although they held back the autofocus system. The 5D3 was an option when I first went full frame, but the 6D checked most of the boxes I needed at the time and bettered it in a few interestingly similar ways as the R6 does now for the R5. When I was in this same decision before, I got the cheaper body.

I'll concede the resolution and associated capabilities is the headliner feature of the R5, and if it had only 20MP I would be hard pressed to want it as much and definitely not for $1400 more, but might still buy it to get weather sealing and all the rest. As a package, the add on differences are of some real value and like you said it is for each person to decide if they need any of the added features enough to justify the additional monetary pain. Canon are pretty smart at marketing though- they split out features some might find must haves to the higher model, while leaving the lower model still competitive against many other brands.


----------



## Whowe (Jul 17, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Perfect post - one more thing - it only costs about the same as the 5D4 did when it was introduced. It's a bargain.


It is also about the same cost that the old 5Ds-R is currently selling for, which is similar in MP, but far lacking in many other ways compared to the R5. (fps, autofocus, etc.)


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 17, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> Here is an R5 hands on review. Well, sort of a review of using the camera shooting models.



That was a lovely review. Though a lot of the time I kept thinking about how massive the 85mm f/1.2 looks on the R5 and how much bigger it was on the R. It is like Canon's lens designers where completely out of step with the body designers. Nikon's f/1.8's are all slower and less exciting, but they live up to the smaller mirrorless system.


----------



## jd7 (Jul 17, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Perfect post - one more thing - it only costs about the same as the 5D4 did when it was introduced. It's a bargain.


In my neck of the woods (Australia), R5 price is more like 1 series price, and R6 price is 5 series price (and 20 MP sensor in R6 does not excite me at all). Coupled with RF lens prices, if I have to go mirrorless any time soon I will have to look hard at Sony (as much as I've long been a Canon fan and as much as I've never like the Sony ergonomics). Still not cheap, but Sony body plus Sigma and Tamron lenses seem to offer much better value for money for my use as an amateur photographer with no interest in video. (Yes, of course I could use EF lenses on a Canon R body, but then I'm not getting benefits of a mirrorless system such as more compact lenses like the RF 70-200/2.8 or Tamron 70-180/2.8.) I have been very happy with Canon and the R system gear generally looks awesome, but I can't get excited once price is factored in.


----------



## melgross (Jul 17, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> They have also told blatant lies, and provided "opinions" that bear no semblance to the reality of what they're pontificating about, often based on presumptions about how in their view a thing _should _work, rather than on how the manual says they _do _work.
> 
> Misunderstood victims they are not.


No they haven’t. I’ve been reading them for many years, and I haven’t seen any lies. What lies are you referring to? And all reviewers do talk about how manufacturers dont get things right, like the bar on the original “R”. It seems almost everyone doesn’t like that, and Canon said it was an experiment. Ergonomics is important. Menus are important too, and often get criticized. Look at comments about Sony menus.


----------



## melgross (Jul 17, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> That's simply, demonstrably untrue - DPR has habitually criticised things in Canon cameras that they've given no mind to when they've reviewed other manufacturers' cameras with similar issues.
> 
> Specifically, they've reviewed Canon cameras in such a way as to present them at their worst - what they _can't _do - rather than crediting them for what they do well. So, for example - regardless of what else a given Canon might bring to the table - DPR would always downplay its qualities by making greater play of what (in _their_ _opinion_) was an issue, whether or not it was a Real World failing.
> 
> ...


It seems to be a problem with you, and not them.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 17, 2020)

Billybob said:


> Most seemed oblivious to the possibility that DPR hasn't changed, rather it is Canon that changed. I was an avid Canon users for years. I anxiously waited for the release of the 6D II with tremendous anticipation but was sorely disappointed when it was actually inferior to its predecessor in several respects. I considered the 5D IV, but it was more money than I wanted to spend on a camera especially one that, to me, didn't seem significantly better than the M III that it replaced. I bought a 80D hoping to keep a foot in the Canon water, but there was nothing exciting about that camera. And I don't even want to talk about the Rebel releases. How many variations on a single theme can a company trot through without making any discernible progress forward?



There is no doubt that Canon has upped their game. The 5D3 didn't have the dynamic range of the competition and that really showed at the end of that Camera's life. But the 5D4 moved to on-chip ADC, brought the sensor within a half stop of the competition and that should have been the end of it (Uh, 6D2 aside...)

But DPReview has also changed. Chris and Jordan seem to be much better at reviewing *cameras* rather than *sensors*. In the past, DPR seemed a lot more focused on Rishi's (who--to be fair, is the science editor) articles about ISO invariance and is it possible to lift 5 stops without banding when shooting a horse trotting down a beach with the sun directly behind it.

Anyways, I've been reading DPR for over a decade (edit: omfg I joined in 2003?!) and they've definitely gone through some shifts. Not super fair to lump 20 years of coverage into a single "DPR isn't fair to canon" statement.


----------



## cornieleous (Jul 17, 2020)

Billybob said:


> I can't help but chuckle at the number of comments asserting that finally a DPR review is fair to Canon. They're amazed that Chris and Jordan have finally shed DPR's anti-Canon bias and given a Canon product a fair trial. Some of these same comments assert that it won't last and the R5 will get the same old biased treatment.
> 
> Most seemed oblivious to the possibility that DPR hasn't changed, rather it is Canon that changed. I was an avid Canon users for years. I anxiously waited for the release of the 6D II with tremendous anticipation but was sorely disappointed when it was actually inferior to its predecessor in several respects. I considered the 5D IV, but it was more money than I wanted to spend on a camera especially one that, to me, didn't seem significantly better than the M III that it replaced. I bought a 80D hoping to keep a foot in the Canon water, but there was nothing exciting about that camera. And I don't even want to talk about the Rebel releases. How many variations on a single theme can a company trot through without making any discernible progress forward?
> 
> ...




Interesting take, maybe there is something to it with some reviewers wanting to encourage Canon. 

I view Canon a lot like Toyota. Some of the most, if not the most reliable and tested platforms, but not always the flashiest. Yet they do innovate and then wait for several years selling that set of technology while still commanding the price premium. Each time they innovate it is often class leading or nearly, then they lag behind as the old stalwart but uninteresting. 

Where I almost strayed from Canon was when I took up astro. The 6D, as ahead of its time as its sensor was for that market segment, could not keep up and had excessive shadow noise compared to competitors that nothing but excruciating post processing and exposure blending could work around, and even then 3 stops of noise was not going away. I wanted low shadow noise in my night landscapes but it was very hard to get while other brands were offering something that could. Instead of jumping, I looked at the system and what Canon was doing about the issue. They bought their own sensor foundry, they were not following the feature war, they kept producing well tested bodies that didn't have silly problems in the field like some of the most innovative brands. I went about 1.5 years of waiting and the 5D4 came out. I saved all that money changing systems and they answered with a camera near enough to any competitor in real world application as to be irrelevant. The shadow noise was gone, and I now had a much nicer body. Even bought mine refurbished about a year after its release to save more money, but I only upgraded because of a real world limitation I was encountering, not spec sheets. Canon seems to get bashed too often on perception and not real world issues by some reviewers.

I think Canon is a long strategy company and I would wager owning their own sensor foundry is going to preserve them when Sony cuts off Nikon and others from buying their best. Their refusal to race spec sheets doesn't mean they won't game the market like they did with the 8K feature here on R5, but I still see them consistently offering the best system of bodies and lenses, at least for my varied needs. 

The one place I agree with others that was plainly not fair to Canon, is the entire review industry did not just point out the real world failings of a few Canon cameras, they continued whipping the dead horse and creating false perceptions about overall capability. There are, right this second, brand loyalists out there all over the interwebs claiming Canon sensors suck, blathering still about the cripple hammer, and other inane and baseless stuff, when Canon have been very competitive with sensors since the 80D, and always competitive in most other features. They have lead in rugged design and reliability along with Nikon for decades.

The dynamic range issue is the one I still hear the most, and it was ridiculous and mostly applies to low ISO anyway. It was a simple buzzword most people could grasp. The real problem was the ADC readout chain on Canon sensors was adding read noise. Canon then reduced read noise like everyone else with on chip ADC and it was clear that their read noise + random noise was as good or better than other brands. At high ISO, several Canon bodies have better DR than competitors as a result of sensor tech improvement. 

Anyway, love or hate reviews, they do help us all out like brand competition by motivating innovation. Nice to see Canon get some good reviews for a change if for no other reason than hard work and quality result deserve to be recognized.


----------



## Billybob (Jul 17, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> That's simply, demonstrably untrue - DPR has habitually criticised things in Canon cameras that they've given no mind to when they've reviewed other manufacturers' cameras with similar issues.
> 
> Specifically, they've reviewed Canon cameras in such a way as to present them at their worst - what they _can't _do - rather than crediting them for what they do well. So, for example - regardless of what else a given Canon might bring to the table - DPR would always downplay its qualities by making greater play of what (in _their_ _opinion_) was an issue, whether or not it was a Real World failing.
> 
> ...


So, what I hear you saying, is because DPR valued characteristics differently from the way you valued them, they were biased and unfair. Is that correct? Since high DR is of little value to you--or less important than other features--then DPR must put the same weight as you do on it. For me, as long as they provide their yardstick and tell me their weights, and they are consistent in applying them , I don't find them unfair. I just may not agree. 

Now, don't get me wrong. I do not consider the 5D IV a bad camera nor any of the XXD cameras bad. To be absolutely objective, they were and are all excellent photographic instruments. But none of them pushed the envelop (I am intentionally not considering the 1DX series since that camera is targeted at a tier that I don't frequent); none were best of breed. The 5D IV was an incremental improvement over the III, but the jump to 30MP when Nikon had been offering 36MP and Sony 42MP for awhile was a huge yawn. And 7fps was merely catching up with other cameras like the D750 but trailed the 7D II and D500, which offered 10fps. The IV was a perfectly functional camera at the time of release, and perhaps, a decent upgrade to users of previous 5D cameras, but I got the feeling that several features had been throttled back to prevent potential 1DX buyers from slumming it with a more affordable 5D camera. Basically if I had to characterize the IV in a few words they would be cautious and conservative but highly functional. 

This is where the lukewarm and tepid reviews came from. Perhaps it was bias, a bias in favor of cutting-edge, boundary-expanding technology. Canon just was not selling that until now. Personally, I'm happy to see Canon back in the game.


----------



## padam (Jul 17, 2020)

jd7 said:


> In my neck of the woods (Australia), R5 price is more like 1 series price, and R6 price is 5 series price (and 20 MP sensor in R6 does not excite me at all). Coupled with RF lens prices, if I have to go mirrorless any time soon I will have to look hard at Sony, as much as I've long been a Canon fan. Not cheap, but Sony body plus Sigma and Tamron lenses seem to offer much better value for money for my use as an amateur photographer with no interest in video. (Yes, of course I could use EF lenses on a Canon R body, but then I'm not getting benefits of a mirrorless system such as more compact lenses like the RF 70-200/2.8 or Tamron 70-180/2.8.) I have been very happy with Canon and the R system gear generally looks awesome, but I can't get excited once price is factored in.


Cheap lenses like an RF 70-200 f/4L IS USM are in development. It's obvious which system has the most lenses, especially the smaller and cheaper ones (Sony), but also obvious which system has a stronger foundation with the mount and IBIS, ergonomics with bigger lenses, etc. (Canon)

The EOS R is still a fine camera for stills images and a very solid upgrade over the 6D II for not that much (had both) especially where dual card slots might not be mandatory to have and the video drawbacks don't play a big factor.

Sigma lenses are rumoured to come in RF-mount, we just don't know anything concrete about it yet.

A 2-year-old A7III is going to be more discounted that an R5/R6 that could be on backorder for quite a awhile actually, that's quite obvious.


----------



## marioslrzn (Jul 17, 2020)

Lenscracker said:


> There are also some RF lenses that do not have IS installed in them. The 28-70 F/2.0 is one of them. I am considering a purchase but I want to know how much the IBIS alone will help to steady it.


They claim 8 stops of IBIS with the 28-70f2, 7 stops with the 50f1.2, there’s a list already from canon, so you don’t need lens IS to get 8 stops, depends on the lens and how fast the lens


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

fentiger said:


> would people move downmarket from a 1DX2 to R5?




Does a 1DX2 have:

MF assist through the viewfinder without changing out focusing screens?
The ability to use RF lenses?
A tilty-flippy?
45 MP?
8K?
Eye AF? (Through the VF?)
No. 

So... sure. Folks might absolutely move from a 1DX2 to an R5 if they needed one of the above features badly enough.

- A


----------



## Nelu (Jul 17, 2020)

kafala said:


> The R6 does not record video to both card slots simultaneously and there's no video recording in aperture mode. Plus it does not have ALL-I mode for video recording. I will stick with my Z6 for now.


Good choice!


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> There's nothing "half hearted" about a camera that does everything very well, and Canon cameras invariably do. Bells and whistles rarely make for a better _camera_, and being impressed by shiny shiny while ignoring solid, worthwhile Real World performance, does not make for a good, fair, objective review.




I take your point -- their priorities seem to completely de-prioritize ergonomics, size of supporting ecosystem, overall reliability, the general shooting experience, etc.

But they are not being arbitrary about focusing on sensor quality and horsepower specs. They are not setting what the market wants -- they are listening to what their readers care about, and they make it a point to speak to those things in their reviews.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

davidhfe said:


> But DPReview has also changed. Chris and Jordan seem to be much better at reviewing *cameras* rather than *sensors*. In the past, DPR seemed a lot more focused on Rishi's (who--to be fair, is the science editor) articles about ISO invariance and is it possible to lift 5 stops without banding when shooting a horse trotting down a beach with the sun directly behind it.




This. 100%.

I rejoiced when our favorite Camera Store alums moved over to DPR. Thoughtfulness replaced judgment at DPR that day.

- A


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 17, 2020)

marioslrzn said:


> They claim 8 stops of IBIS with the 28-70f2, 7 stops with the 50f1.2, there’s a list already from canon, so you don’t need lens IS to get 8 stops, depends on the lens and how fast the lens


Apparently Canon puts some sensors in at least some of their non IS lenses that aid IBIS in achieving more shake reduction.


----------



## zim (Jul 17, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Does a1DX2 have:
> 
> MF assist through the viewfinder without changing out focusing screens?
> The ability to use RF lenses?
> ...


And if they need a camera to survive a fist fight they might not, nout to do with down market


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 17, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> Apparently Canon puts some sensors in at least some of their non IS lenses that aid IBIS in achieving more shake reduction.



That would suggest they planned IBIS all along. I recall, perhaps incorrectly, that they where pushing IS as 'the' way.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

marioslrzn said:


> They claim 8 stops of IBIS with the 28-70f2, 7 stops with the 50f1.2, there’s a list already from canon, so you don’t need lens IS to get 8 stops, depends on the lens and how fast the lens




I'll wait for testing on that. Chris said (start vid around 8:45) he was reeling in sharp shots at 105mm with the RF 24-105L at 1/4s. 

We don't know how strong his holding technique is, how stable his hands are, etc. but assuming a 1/FL would be sharp in his hands (on that 20 MP sensor), 1/4s would represent '4.something' stops of IS, while that 24-105L is one of the lenses rated for 8 stops. 

He may have super shaky hands or poor technique* and he was actually getting more IS performance than that estimate above (i.e. without IS he might have needed, say, 1/160 to net sharp 105mm shots). So we won't know what we're really dealing with until we have proper controlled [IS off] / [Lens IS only] / [IBIS only] / [Lens IS + IBIS] hitrate testing on a variety of RF and EF lenses.

_*Kinda doubt it, though. He knows gear and everyone seems to get super focused on grip/technique when they are pushing shutter speed to the outer limits like that._

- A


----------



## jd7 (Jul 17, 2020)

padam said:


> Cheap lenses like an RF 70-200 f/4L IS USM are in development. It's obvious which system has the most lenses, especially the smaller and cheaper ones (Sony), but also obvious which system has a stronger foundation with the mount and IBIS, ergonomics with bigger lenses, etc. (Canon)
> 
> The EOS R is still a fine camera for stills images and a very solid upgrade over the 6D II for not that much (had both) especially where dual card slots might not be mandatory to have and the video drawbacks don't play a big factor.
> 
> ...


I agree the R system seems to have a fantastic foundation, but the questions are how much Canon is going to charge for it, and what the competition is offering. Would be great if Sigma and Tamron start offering RF mount lenses, and if Samyang keep releasing lenses like their RF 85mm f/1.4 AF, but we will have to see what happens.

As for an EOS R being a solid upgrade for me over my 6D II, I'm far from convinced about that. Yes it would give me a newer sensor, but I'd get lesser battery life, lower FPS when tracking and, most importantly to me, have to deal with an EVF introducing latency into what I'm seeing (not to mention I spend too much time looking at screens as it is!). Plus the current asking price for an EOS R plus control ring adapter is around A$3000, which is almost 50% more than I paid for my 6D II. And as I alluded to in my earlier post, there is the price of the RF lenses too consider too. All in all, I'm not at all sure I'd be happy if I spent money on an R.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 17, 2020)

Lenscracker said:


> There are also some RF lenses that do not have IS installed in them. The 28-70 F/2.0 is one of them. I am considering a purchase but I want to know how much the IBIS alone will help to steady it.




Here you go -- it's charted out here, from DPReview:

​​- A


----------



## gbc (Jul 17, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> I see where you are coming from and you do have a point that the R6 was given an honest upgrade with good technology and even edges the R5 in a couple areas- the 6D did much the same to the 5D3 although they held back the autofocus system. The 5D3 was an option when I first went full frame, but the 6D checked most of the boxes I needed at the time and bettered it in a few interestingly similar ways as the R6 does now for the R5. When I was in this same decision before, I got the cheaper body.
> 
> I'll concede the resolution and associated capabilities is the headliner feature of the R5, and if it had only 20MP I would be hard pressed to want it as much and definitely not for $1400 more, but might still buy it to get weather sealing and all the rest. As a package, the add on differences are of some real value and like you said it is for each person to decide if they need any of the added features enough to justify the additional monetary pain. Canon are pretty smart at marketing though- they split out features some might find must haves to the higher model, while leaving the lower model still competitive against many other brands.


I have both on preorder but will cancel one. At this point, leaning toward getting the R5. There's just ONE too many concessions I think with the R6. If it was even the 30MP of the original R I'd probably stick with the R6. Or if it had the better weather sealing. Or maybe even the top LCD. The R6 looks great... but, maybe irrationally, I finally just want the top of the line item.


----------



## padam (Jul 17, 2020)

jd7 said:


> As for an EOS R being a solid upgrade for me over my 6D II, I'm far from convinced about that. Yes it would give me a newer sensor, but I'd get lesser battery life, lower FPS when tracking and, most importantly to me, have to deal with an EVF introducing latency into what I'm seeing (not to mention I spend too much time looking at screens as it is!). Plus the current asking price for an EOS R plus control ring adapter is around A$3000, which is almost 50% more than I paid for my 6D II. And as I alluded to in my earlier post, there is the price of the RF lenses too consider too. All in all, I'm not at all sure I'd be happy if I spent money on an R.


At the moment, Canon is offering more, so of course they have the right to charge more for it.

I can only say that I shoot people and the EOS R does a far, far better job than the 6D II ever did, the focus was off sometimes (so it was actually not bad changing to the LCD sometimes, where it was more reliable), while it is dead-on on the EOS R as long as focus point is placed at the right place or in some cases it is just easier to let it track the face and fire at the right moment without worrying about focusing. Not a small improvement.
I have shot a running event with it where the 6D II faired better, but I was using the wrong settings, so not giving the 6D II a win there either but the R is not a sports camera.

The battery life is honestly very good on the R as well, I guess it was even better on the 6D II, but it didn't matter in practise (far superior to the RP, and that is enough, probably much better than these new cameras as well with the IBIS and other stuff).

Well, if you hate the EVF, then you'll hate it a lot more on the Sony, that's all I can say about that...
The EOS R is the best EVF I've used but I still only rate it as 'decent', certainly not anything like an optical viewfinder, but it's pretty good and the trade-off is that I can get accurate focus a lot better and the right exposure is also easier to achieve.
Not the best camera by any means, but pretty capable overall, especially for the money, it is probably in stock everywhere, so deals can be found sooner or later.


----------



## Isaacheus (Jul 17, 2020)

padam said:


> Cheap lenses like an RF 70-200 f/4L IS USM are in development. It's obvious which system has the most lenses, especially the smaller and cheaper ones (Sony), but also obvious which system has a stronger foundation with the mount and IBIS, ergonomics with bigger lenses, etc. (Canon)
> 
> The EOS R is still a fine camera for stills images and a very solid upgrade over the 6D II for not that much (had both) especially where dual card slots might not be mandatory to have and the video drawbacks don't play a big factor.
> 
> ...



I'm looking at the prices here down under (NZ) and the r6 is coming in at 5k nzd, which is only $500 less than what I pre-ordered my a7r3 for when it first announced. 

The r5 is nearly 8k, which is more than an A9 mk2 here

Lenses don't seem quite as bad over the others, but still nearly a good 1k more in many options, and sometimes more. 

Certainly expect to see things come down with time, but right now it's not that easy to get into the rf line


----------



## jd7 (Jul 17, 2020)

padam said:


> At the moment, Canon is offering more, so of course they have the right to charge more for it.
> 
> I can only say that I shoot people and the EOS R does a far, far better job than the 6D II ever did, the focus was off sometimes (so it was actually not bad changing to the LCD sometimes, where it was more reliable), while it is dead-on on the EOS R as long as focus point is placed at the right place or in some cases it is just easier to let it track the face and fire at the right moment without worrying about focusing. Not a small improvement.
> I have shot a running event with it where the 6D II faired better, but I was using the wrong settings, so not giving the 6D II a win there either but the R is not a sports camera.
> ...


But is Canon really offering more than the competition? The answer will no doubt depend on what you want to do with the camera. I have no interest in video and for my use, a Sony A7 III would offer me at least much of what the R6 would offer (although I am confident I would prefer the R6's ergonimics) and a slightly higher resolution (which I would appreciate, even if it is not a lot) and access to lenses like the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 DN and Tamron 70-180 f/2.8 (which are much cheaper than the similar RF lenses and get great reviews, even if they may not be quite as good as the Canons).

As for EOS R versus 6d II, I'm glad the R has worked out for you. I certainly don't think the R is a poor camera, and I have thought about it giving it a go. Battery life has been a big deal for me though as I have taken my camera on hiking trips where I don't have access to power for days at a time (although the reality is I probably won't be doing any more of those trips any time soon, so that has probably become less of an issue for me now). I take your point about AF accuracy, and that is certainly one of the attractions with mirrorless, but I am not a fan of EVFs so I doubt I would be thrilled by one whether it's Sony or Canon (atlhough I will be interested to hear more about the EVFs in the R5 and R6). And with the 6D II I have an OVF but still do have the option of switching into live view when I want AF accuracy. So, in the end I remain unconvinced about the EOS R for me, especially once you factor in RF lens prices.

The R system gear seems fantastic in many ways, but if I'm going to end up with a mirrorless camera, and therefore have to deal with an EVF and reduced battery life compared with an DSLR, I cannot help feeling that a Sony-based system would give me much better bang for the buck, at least at the moment. As a long time Canon user, I'm surprised and unhappy to be saying that, but that is how it seems to me.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 17, 2020)

Whowe said:


> It is also about the same cost that the old 5Ds-R is currently selling for, which is similar in MP, but far lacking in many other ways compared to the R5. (fps, autofocus, etc.)




This may be true, but unless something dramatic happens I'll never own anything but a mirrorless from here on out. I like them that much.


----------



## padam (Jul 18, 2020)

jd7 said:


> The R system gear seems fantastic in many ways, but if I'm going to end up with a mirrorless camera, and therefore have to deal with an EVF and reduced battery life compared with an DSLR, I cannot help feeling that a Sony-based system would give me much better bang for the buck, at least at the moment. As a long time Canon user, I'm surprised and unhappy to be saying that, but that is how it seems to me.


Instead of speculating, why not try the cameras out? I just see to much hypothesis on this.

Maybe I got used to the older mirrorless cameras, but I really do think the battery life is very good on the R, considering the screen and EVF are both much higher quality than the Sony.

If you take it for hike for days, why not carry a power bank as well? One spare battery (original of course), plus the power bank should be enough, but of course you can carry more if you don't feel safe.
As long as it is PD compatible, it will fully charge up the EOS R in two hours, when it is not being used, almost as fast as the wall charger.
While the Sony also has USB charging, it is not PD so it is slower.
I use a Huawei CP12S which very small and light, weighs like 225g, and it can probably charge the camera four times but I'm sure that there are other options.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 18, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> That would suggest they planned IBIS all along. I recall, perhaps incorrectly, that they where pushing IS as 'the' way.


Well all along for about the last 3 yrs when they must have decided internally to throw in the towel in the IS superior to IBIS argument. That would have been when they were laying out the R5/6 design and how they would communicate between IBIS and IS , or lens embedded sensors. Just speculation on my part, but makes some sense. Remember the new -iii EF superteles got the extra pin outs in anticipation of this.


----------



## IcyBergs (Jul 18, 2020)

AEWest said:


> I think that if they are concerned about impact of Olympus demise on their site usage, they have serious problems.


Yeah Oly fans aren't in abundance, that wasn't what I meant. Canon fan traffic could help offset whatever Oly was clearly paying them to pimp their gear. Nobody pimped Olympus quite like DPReview in my opinion.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 18, 2020)

melgross said:


> No they haven’t. I’ve been reading them for many years, and I haven’t seen any lies. What lies are you referring to? And all reviewers do talk about how manufacturers dont get things right, like the bar on the original “R”. It seems almost everyone doesn’t like that, and Canon said it was an experiment. Ergonomics is important. Menus are important too, and often get criticized. Look at comments about Sony menus.


They lied about the 5DS R, we even had Rishi on here trying to defend and obfuscate around his lies, but despite the many thousands of RAW image files they have posted he refused to prove his truthfulness and would not post even the EXIF of the file he was lying about.

Here is a screenshot of the image, he even agreed it was misleading and took it down for a few days then threw his toys out his pram and put it back up even though he agreed it was not a fair representation.


----------



## Isaacheus (Jul 18, 2020)

padam said:


> Instead of speculating, why not try the cameras out? I just see to much hypothesis on this.
> 
> Maybe I got used to the older mirrorless cameras, but I really do think the battery life is very good on the R, considering the screen and EVF are both much higher quality than the Sony.
> 
> ...



Jumping on this, is it known whether you can power/charge the r6/5 while using the camera or does it have to be powered down to work? The sonys I use let you power it through the usbc port, which is fantastic for longer video and timelapse


----------



## jd7 (Jul 18, 2020)

padam said:


> Instead of speculating, why not try the cameras out? I just see to much hypothesis on this.
> 
> Maybe I got used to the older mirrorless cameras, but I really do think the battery life is very good on the R, considering the screen and EVF are both much higher quality than the Sony.
> 
> ...


I've tried out the cameras in stores, and I don't otherwise have access to them. There is nowhere near me which does cost effective rental of camera bodies, so far as I know. So, if I'm going to make a choice just based on handling cameras in a store, the decision is easy for me - I didn't like the EOS R or the A7 III nearly as much as my 6D II. The 6d II seemed faster (ie more responsive) and I preferred the OVF - I simply preferred shooting it. However, I accept that sometimes you have to use something for a while to get used to it, and then your opinion can change. So, I accept it's possible that if I had extended time with the cameras, maybe they might win me over ... I'm just not betting on it, and I cannot cost-effectively just give it a try.


----------



## padam (Jul 18, 2020)

Isaacheus said:


> I'm looking at the prices here down under (NZ) and the r6 is coming in at 5k nzd, which is only $500 less than what I pre-ordered my a7r3 for when it first announced.
> 
> The r5 is nearly 8k, which is more than an A9 mk2 here
> 
> ...


The A7RIII is from 2017 and a lot has changed since then.
It is just like in the the EU, except the Sony cameras are also similarly priced, the A9II costs significantly more than the R5, as it should be.

I don't like paying full prices just to get that novelty, I would rather wait a year and pay as little as possible and buy lenses in the meantime, etc. these cameras are very nice, but probably not strictly necessary for a lot of people, but if they are already in the Canon system, the cost may not be that excessive either.



Isaacheus said:


> Jumping on this, is it known whether you can power/charge the r6/5 while using the camera or does it have to be powered down to work? The sonys I use let you power it through the usbc port, which is fantastic for longer video and timelapse


Yes they have improved that and these new models can be continuously powered from USB-C


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Sure, but the big, beefy horsepower specs and major feature adds are all here:
> ​DPAF II​1DX3 sensor (i.e. outdated handmedown off-chip 5D3/6D1 sensor tech no more for this price point)​IBIS​12 / 20 fps​Huge buffer​Eye AF for all sorts of creatures​Two slots​Joystick​Thumbwheel​
> Or put another way, put the R6 sensor in the R5 and take away the 8K and nicer 4K features. _Would you sell that camera alongside the R6? _I'm not sure I would. That sensor is the beating heart of the $3899 value proposition.
> 
> ...




Respectfully disagree.

All the little things you pass over add value and they are things that matter to most people. I use the top LCD all the time. The big, brilliant R5 EVF is going to be a joy to use. The rear display is better. Not only does R5 offer better video, it offers more modes in which to shoot the video. The R6 is mostly plastic, the R5 is mostly metal, and it's weather sealed. R5 wifi is 5ghz compatible. R5 gets dual-pixel RAW.

Then there is the sensor.

I'll agree that the R6 is a good, feature rich buy, but I believe the R5 is an absolute bargain for all it offers - not just the vastly superior sensor.

20MP? Seriously?


----------



## padam (Jul 18, 2020)

jd7 said:


> I've tried out the cameras in stores, and I don't otherwise have access to them. There is nowhere near me which does cost effective rental of camera bodies, so far as I know. So, if I'm going to make a choice just based on handling cameras in a store, the decision is easy for me - I didn't like the EOS R or the A7 III nearly as much as my 6D II. The 6d II seemed faster (ie more responsive) and I preferred the OVF - I simply preferred shooting it. However, I accept that sometimes you have to use something for a while to get used to it, and then your opinion can change. So, I accept it's possible that if I had extended time with the cameras, maybe they might win me over ... I'm just not betting on it, and I cannot cost-effectively just give it a try.


Understood. Ultimately, it always comes down to personal preference.
It did take me quite a long time to set it up (I still think I can set it up even better), but it felt right in the hands from the first time, better than the 6D II.
I find it more responsive than the Sony, which wakes up slower from standby and there is a slight lag with the controls that is absent on the R. The touch screen is just easy to use, these are just some things that don't show at all in the spec sheets.
While I do prefer the OVF as well, I just can't be confident about getting the focus and there are some RF lenses which represent good value, like the 24-105L or the 35/1.8, and the list will keep growing but yes I definitely think it is geared more towards people who like f/1.2 primes or f/2 zooms (or f/2.8 holy trinity zooms with image stabilisation) while the Sony is best at keeping everything as compact as possible.


----------



## Isaacheus (Jul 18, 2020)

padam said:


> The A7RIII is from 2017 and a lot has changed since then.
> It is just like in the the EU, except the Sony cameras are also similarly priced, the A9II costs significantly more than the R5, as it should be.
> 
> I don't like paying full prices just to get that novelty, I would rather wait a year and pay as little as possible and buy lenses in the meantime, etc. these cameras are very nice, but probably not strictly necessary for a lot of people, but if they are already in the Canon system, the cost may not be that excessive either.



Yeah, the point I was making is that right now the Canon system here is quite a jump to get into (especially so if you need new lenses). Even with the ef lenses that are around. 

In more recent terms, the a7r4 is very similarly priced to the r6 (about 200 in it), the comparison to the a7riii price was just because I knew the launch price (not sure what the a7r4 came in at locally to start)


----------



## padam (Jul 18, 2020)

Isaacheus said:


> Yeah, the point I was making is that right now the Canon system here is quite a jump to get into (especially so if you need new lenses). Even with the ef lenses that are around.6,
> 
> In more recent terms, the a7r4 is very similarly priced to the r6 (about 200 in it), the comparison to the a7riii price was just because I knew the launch price (not sure what the a7r4 came in at locally to start)


I expect the gray market prices in the A7R4 with the discounts to be very close to the R6 launch price here, so it is not too dissimilar.
I'd still choose the R6, on the basis that it is a better all-round camera, while the A7R4 is strong if one really needs 61MP (a 26MP crop mode for instance), but not that necessary otherwise.
They are different cameras, I am just not that surprised that the pricing is not that different, because the Canon offers many things that are better, despite being the cheap version of the two new models. It's practically one generation newer camera, and it shows. Sony still has some things to fix in the inevitable A7R5 while Canon is pretty good to go for some years, maybe they will shorten their usual 4-year product cycles with the RF, I am not sure about that.

Some may mock the 20MP on the R6, but apart from that, not only everything works that's useful, but they also work very well.


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 18, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> They lied about the 5DS R, we even had Rishi on here trying to defend and obfuscate around his lies, but despite the many thousands of RAW image files they have posted he refused to prove his truthfulness and would not post even the EXIF of the file he was lying about.
> 
> Here is a screenshot of the image, he even agreed it was misleading and took it down for a few days then threw his toys out his pram and put it back up even though he agreed it was not a fair representation.



omfg I'm having flashbacks I forgot about that image


----------



## snappy604 (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I'm with you. My now pensionable 5D3 is highly likely to finally be retired for the R5. We're just not traveling anytime soon  , so I may save my money and get one next year when the price comes down a bit.
> 
> I certainly have the funds to get it right now, but I'd overwhelmingly just be shooting the family and flowers in the yard, you know?
> 
> - A


Are you saying your flowers don't deserve the best?!


----------



## Charbax (Jul 18, 2020)

Not a mention of the huge deal breakers of the R6:
- R6 cannot record video to both SD card slots, photo proxies to second SD card only. They added a useless second SD card slot
- R6 has a 30min limit even though the EU 30min tax ended 19 months ago.
- R6 overheats 4K60 and it also overheats oversampled 4K30 at standard room temperature, in normal summer weather it probably burns up even much sooner.

The R6 looked great initially, but Canon needs to fix all those issues in an R6 mark2 before this camera can be considered.


----------



## Colorado (Jul 18, 2020)

fentiger said:


> would people move downmarket from a 1DX2 to R5?


I can't speak to 1DX2 users but my current situation is that I am one of those amateur photographers that has a 1DX. I have no monetary justification for having bought 1 series cameras. If I am being honest real life pressures have had me drift away from photography as a hobby. The jump from a 1DX (Mark Zero) to a 5D is not really downmarket for me. I get a lot more and can still use my EF lenses and pick up RF lenses when I can. And some new toys might re-spark interest in the hobby.


----------



## addola (Jul 18, 2020)

Cat_Interceptor said:


> So to summarise -
> 
> The R6 is just as good as the specs suggest and the footage from the pre-productin R5 is WHOOOOOOOOOAh good. And the IBIS is Olympus level on a FF



Yeah, the footage from the R5 is awesome, with lots of dynamic range given the time of day they shot it (harsh sunlight). They might have shot in CLOG and graded it, but it looks amazing!


----------



## marioslrzn (Jul 18, 2020)

jd7 said:


> I agree the R system seems to have a fantastic foundation, but the questions are how much Canon is going to charge for it, and what the competition is offering. Would be great if Sigma and Tamron start offering RF mount lenses, and if Samyang keep releasing lenses like their RF 85mm f/1.4 AF, but we will have to see what happens.
> 
> As for an EOS R being a solid upgrade for me over my 6D II, I'm far from convinced about that. Yes it would give me a newer sensor, but I'd get lesser battery life, lower FPS when tracking and, most importantly to me, have to deal with an EVF introducing latency into what I'm seeing (not to mention I spend too much time looking at screens as it is!). Plus the current asking price for an EOS R plus control ring adapter is around A$3000, which is almost 50% more than I paid for my 6D II. And as I alluded to in my earlier post, there is the price of the RF lenses too consider too. All in all, I'm not at all sure I'd be happy if I spent money on an R.


It’s too bad they can’t give them away, with any new technology there’s always going to be that premium tag, it’s just not canon that has that, Any sony gmaster lens cost just as much as the RF lens, they just release a new 12-24f2.8 for $3k, so you might be better off just staying with the 6dII, and if you move up to the R you Can use all you’re lenses, so in reality you’re just looking at $1700 . I have the R and it’s way better than The 6d. I’m getting the R5 aswell, good times


----------



## navastronia (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Here you go -- it's charted out here, from DPReview:
> 
> View attachment 191395​​- A



It occurs to me that since you shoot Canon, and are known for wanting a 50mm IS, you might enjoy using the 50/1.2 on an R5 or R6, given that you'd get 7 stops of IS that way. Is this in the cards for you, or are you holding out for a 50/1.4?


----------



## navastronia (Jul 18, 2020)

I'm hopeful that with the R5 and R6, we're entering a kind of golden age. Canon's camera releases haven't excited anyone this much in a long time.


----------



## marioslrzn (Jul 18, 2020)

Charbax said:


> Not a mention of the huge deal breakers of the R6:
> - R6 cannot record video to both SD card slots, photo proxies to second SD card only. They added a useless second SD card slot
> - R6 has a 30min limit even though the EU 30min tax ended 19 months ago.
> - R6 overheats 4K60 and it also overheats oversampled 4K30 at standard room temperature, in normal summer weather it probably burns up even much sooner.
> ...


If you need to do long sessions, A ninja V will give you unlimited recording and no heating issues, I think that’s what a lot people do anyways with these cameras when they film a lot


----------



## jd7 (Jul 18, 2020)

marioslrzn said:


> It’s too bad they can’t give them away, with any new technology there’s always going to be that premium tag, it’s just not canon that has that, Any sony gmaster lens cost just as much as the RF lens, they just release a new 12-24f2.8 for $3k, so you might be better off just staying with the 6dII, and if you move up to the R you Can use all you’re lenses, so in reality you’re just looking at $1700 . I have the R and it’s way better than The 6d. I’m getting the R5 aswell, good times


Yeah, there is some reason to stick with Canon so I can keep using existing lenses, but then again if I'm going to end up with a mirrorless camera I'd like to be in a system which has lenses like a 24-70 2.8 (eg the Sigma one for Sony) and a relatively compact and light weight (Tamron) 70-180 (if not 70-200) which I might consider buying. With the RF lenses at current prices, I'm not going to be buying the RF 24-70 2.8 IS or RF 70-200 2.8 IS any time in the foreseeable future, least of all when there are much cheaper alternatives available if I switched to Sony. The Canon lenses might be awesome, but if I'm not going to buy them they are not any good to me! And as for getting an EOS R for $1,700, I assume you are talking about US$1,700. EOS R prices have gone up here in Australia even just in the last couple of weeks. Leaving aside grey market, stores are now selling them for about A$3,000, and that does not even include an RF/EF adapter. Even grey market is at least A$2400. 

I'm not sure what I will do, but probably I will just keep using what I have for now. Still, a bit paradoxically, the R5 and R6 have pushed me closer to chaning to Sony than I've evr been before. It seems like Canon really will focus on the R system going forwards, so even though I expect the EF system will be around for a while yet the question is whether there will be any new development of it. Give me a camera with an OVF (so presumably a DSLR) and the AF accuracy of the R system and the ability to put an AF point anywhere, and I would be interested! Doesn't seem like that is going to happen though (if it is even possible). Anyway, my current gear may not be the latest and greatest, but it's still good gear so no reason I can't be happy with it for some time to come.

EDIT: And yes, I know they cannot give them a way. My point though is just that I can get comparable gear for my uses in the Sony system (albeit perhaps using Sigma and Tamron lenses) which seem to me to offer much better value than the R system gear.


----------



## sanj (Jul 18, 2020)

Colorado said:


> I can't speak to 1DX2 users but my current situation is that I am one of those amateur photographers that has a 1DX. I have no monetary justification for having bought 1 series cameras. If I am being honest real life pressures have had me drift away from photography as a hobby. The jump from a 1DX (Mark Zero) to a 5D is not really downmarket for me. I get a lot more and can still use my EF lenses and pick up RF lenses when I can. And some new toys might re-spark interest in the hobby.


I am delighted I cancelled my 1dx2 pre-order the moment pandemic started


----------



## RobbieHat (Jul 18, 2020)

So nice to hear him say Canon has finally caught up on areas they had traditionally been behind on (DR, IBIS, Eye focus) and is blowing others away in many other areas (focus tracking, FPS, color science, etc.). This is going to be a fun camera to get my hands on when it finally arrives. I ordered the R5 and a few RF lenses, a 1.4x extender, a grip and a few batteries. Really looking forward to upgrading from my 5DSR for wildlife! Will also use this for astro since it is likely going to be much cleaner at high ISO than the 5DSR. Can't wait. 

Bob


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 18, 2020)

navastronia said:


> It occurs to me that since you shoot Canon, and are known for wanting a 50mm IS, you might enjoy using the 50/1.2 on an R5 or R6, given that you'd get 7 stops of IS that way. Is this in the cards for you, or are you holding out for a 50/1.4?




IBIS is huge, but it doesn't make big/heavy glass any lighter. So when I get an R5 (likely next year I'd guess), I'll still want a small modern 50 but will likely adapt my trusty old EF 50 f/1.4 on it until I get one. 

That said, I have shot the RF 50L with a CPS Loaner and I was in love with everything about it other than size/weight. Stellar lens I'd be glad to own, but I wouldn't bring it everywhere because of the aforementioned heft.

So getting the R5 doesn't solve my small 50 prime problem, but it opens a few more doors for me. It's possible I finally accept a third party lens with untrustworthy AF if I have the MF assist tools through the viewfinder. Mirrorless has a nice added appeal there.

- A


----------



## Isaacheus (Jul 18, 2020)

padam said:


> I expect the gray market prices in the A7R4 with the discounts to be very close to the R6 launch price here, so it is not too dissimilar.
> I'd still choose the R6, on the basis that it is a better all-round camera, while the A7R4 is strong if one really needs 61MP (a 26MP crop mode for instance), but not that necessary otherwise.
> They are different cameras, I am just not that surprised that the pricing is not that different, because the Canon offers many things that are better, despite being the cheap version of the two new models. It's practically one generation newer camera, and it shows. Sony still has some things to fix in the inevitable A7R5 while Canon is pretty good to go for some years, maybe they will shorten their usual 4-year product cycles with the RF, I am not sure about that.
> 
> Some may mock the 20MP on the R6, but apart from that, not only everything works that's useful, but they also work very well.



Oh yeah, I'm not knocking the r6, and for most cases, it'll be a better option overall.
From a cost perspective here though, the cheaper Canon option here is pretty much 5dmk4 release price, so the bargain moniker might not apply as widely down under. In USD here (with tax applied) its just over $3,200


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 18, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I watched this, but it still feels very much like a preview. I want to see inside the viewfinder and get at look at the AF performance. I want to see images out of the camera. I do not care one little bit how they perform in video.


Jared Polin was unboxing his R5/R6 today and his reviews are usually pretty thorough. He said it would probably take 2 weeks to do a thorough review. I don’t think you can expect more than high level at this point since most of the reviewers have only had the cameras a short time.


----------



## geffy (Jul 18, 2020)

Cat_Interceptor said:


> So to summarise -
> 
> The R6 is just as good as the specs suggest and the footage from the pre-productin R5 is WHOOOOOOOOOAh good. And the IBIS is Olympus level on a FF


only thing on olympus level is zeus


----------



## geffy (Jul 18, 2020)

Dj 7th said:


> Great points you have there, I guess that is why it was difficult deciding which one to go with. I however decided to go with the R5 despite the price increase because I want a more durable body and the higher megapixel count. I also want the 8K, so that I can create still grabs from hard to catch situations.


8k and storm stills sounds a good fit, lightening is a difficult catch


----------



## geffy (Jul 18, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> I don't agree that these cameras are different only in resolution for $1400 or that they are both an R6 with only one major feature difference (resolution). I would agree the $1400 might be slightly much for all that you do get, but it is not just resolution on the list.
> 
> Just talking resolution, when it is needed, 45 vs. 20 MP allows over a third of the frame to be cropped in either dimension and have the same quality, or it can be down sampled uncropped to eliminate noise. It also allows for larger prints, and I did see my large print quality improve when I went from 20-30MP as it obviously should. I could never go back to my 6D @ 20 MP for many types of shooting I do (timelapse, astro photography, severe weather, landscape) without a significant loss in quality and post processing options. For some people, 20MP might be fine as it was for me for many years, but I push right to the edge of even the 5D4 capabilities currently at 30MP, and that extra 1/4 of cropping I can do is used all the time. 45MP will be even better.
> 
> ...


the cropping might not work out as the resolution of the lens may not match the 45mp of the sensor, you would really have to see dxo and do the math, many older lenses suffer with the 20mp


----------



## jd7 (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> IBIS is huge, but it doesn't make big/heavy glass any lighter. So when I get an R5 (likely next year I'd guess), I'll still want a small modern 50 but will likely adapt my trusty old EF 50 f/1.4 on it until I get one.
> 
> That said, I have shot the RF 50L with a CPS Loaner and I was in love with everything about it other than size/weight. Stellar lens I'd be glad to own, but I wouldn't bring it everywhere because of the aforementioned heft.
> 
> ...


Maybe Samyang will give you one. Their RF 85 f/1.4 AF is only a touch heavier than Canon's RF 85 f/2 IS, and seems to get good reviews, eg





I think Samyang already makes a 50m f1/.4 lens (with AF) for Sony.


----------



## navastronia (Jul 18, 2020)

jd7 said:


> Maybe Samyang will give you one. Their RF 85 f/1.4 AF is only a touch heavier than Canon's RF 85 f/2 IS, and seems to get good reviews, eg
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Christopher Frost, my favorite lens reviewer on YouTube


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 18, 2020)

fentiger said:


> would people move downmarket from a 1DX2 to R5?


I loved my 1dx II, but don’t need the robust and heavy body. Good weather sealing and performance is all I need. TheR5 / R6 specs seem to indicate they will meet or exceed the 1dx II. The only unanswered question on both cameras is the EVF lag for fast action. The battery issue I can solve with extra batteries or a grip. I sold my 5dIV last year and the 1dx II was shipped off last week. I am keeping my 70-200 f4 L IS II and 100-400 II until I verify the performance of bodies and comparable RF lenses. The R5 will get used for landscape and wildlife when he light is good, the R6 will be the go to camera when the light fades. I don't really see this as moving downstream as long as both cameras meet their spec an the bodies are reasonably sealed. I can alway return the RF gear and buy a 1dx III if I am not happy, but I have a feeling I am really going to like the new bodies and lenses. 

David


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 18, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> Jared Polin was unboxing his R5/R6 today and his reviews are usually pretty thorough. He said it would probably take 2 weeks to do a thorough review. I don’t think you can expect more than high level at this point since most of the reviewers have only had the cameras a short time.



I’ll likely wait for another reviewer. I just seen one on the R5 posted in this thread that was good. What I am after now is a proper written review and not another YouTube personality. Jared Polin can be entertaining, but he can also be a lot of work to watch as he uses a lot of tone shifts and he is dreadfully excitable.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 18, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I’ll likely wait for another reviewer. I just seen one on the R5 posted in this thread that was good. What I am after now is a proper written review and not another YouTube personality. Jared Polin can be entertaining, but he can also be a lot of work to watch as he uses a lot of tone shifts and he is dreadfully excitable.


If you want a really in depth review, he may be worth tolerating. His review of the 1dx III was thorough and he spent a lot of time breaking down the + / - of the camera. He went the extra step and kludged together a solution to actually shoot the 1dx III as a mirrorless so he could understand the full capability. If he does a thorough review, I can look past the personality. I know he is not for everyone and I can only tolerate in small doses.


----------



## Traveler (Jul 18, 2020)

padam said:


> I think one clarification is missing from Canon: how well does the IBIS work with EF lenses?


They addressed that in one of their Q&A Video right after the introduction (Rudy Winston I think). They said that on paper, the EF lenses will keep their CIPA rating but in the real world they’ll perform better in combination with the IBIS than without.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jul 18, 2020)

Does anybody else wish there was just a few more MPs..? That is literally the only thing I’m unsure about as I do bird photography. 

But then I look at the 1Dxiii and think everything will be fine..

But then I look at my lens and think it’s not a 600mm f4 with a 1.4x TC..

I don’t know.


----------



## Joules (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> while that 24-105L is one of the lenses rated for 8 stops.


I think something to keep in mind is that they are 'up to' ratings. And in a zoom lens, the actual amount of stabilization may vary with the focal length. Testing with one lens should already account for that, by going through the range. And as the image circle of the lens apparently plays a big role in the effectiveness, results from one lens will likely not transfer well to all other lenses, especially for EF ones.


----------



## Charbax (Jul 18, 2020)

marioslrzn said:


> If you need to do long sessions, A ninja V will give you unlimited recording and no heating issues, I think that’s what a lot people do anyways with these cameras when they film a lot


I am not getting a Ninja V, I need unlimited 4K60 dual SD card video recording without any overheating internally. I have to stick to my Panasonic G9 with unlimited 4K60 hack on 1.2 firmware for now (even the AF isn't good enough) until something better comes along. Maybe the Sony A7S3 will be the one for me. Or maybe Sony or Canon soon come with an APS-C that has unlimited 4K60 to dual SD with perfect AF.. or perhaps the GH6/G10 will be the perfect camera upgrade for me. I consider myself pro videographer, I sometimes film 4-6 hours of long footage per day of filming with very short breaks between takes, and I can never have the risk of loosing all footage with an SD card loss/failure. I don't understand how any serious or semi-pro or pro videographer would even consider filming with an R6 that can record video to only one SD card slot. For example a wedding videographer who may lose footage to SD card corruption failure. It's unacceptable. Having to work around overheating and 30min limits is a total deal breaker for me. The Canon Full Frame range is not for me, not for now anyway.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 18, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> If you want a really in depth review, he may be worth tolerating. His review of the 1dx III was thorough and he spent a lot of time breaking down the + / - of the camera. He went the extra step and kludged together a solution to actually shoot the 1dx III as a mirrorless so he could understand the full capability. If he does a thorough review, I can look past the personality. I know he is not for everyone and I can only tolerate in small doses.



It's not so much a dislike for his personality. It is how animated and strange he sounds. It is difficult to explain, the best I do is say people with sensory issues and autism don't do well with someone shouting at you. Unless it is a policeman, police are supposed to shout. 

And aye his content of on the 1DXIII was great, I really quite liked how in depth he went. But it was a bit more calm than the usual.


----------



## londonxt (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I certainly have the funds to get it right now, but I'd overwhelmingly just be shooting the family and flowers in the yard, you know?
> 
> - A



May I tempt you with a free cat with your R5 purchase?


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 18, 2020)

Charbax said:


> […] I consider myself pro videographer, I sometimes film 4-6 hours of long footage per day of filming with very short breaks between takes, and I can never have the risk of loosing all footage with an SD card loss/failure. […]


Such a small world! I’m in a few of your videos  For the back to back interviews you’re doing it would suck to have a card malfunction at the end of the day.


----------



## degos (Jul 18, 2020)

cornieleous said:


> Canon are pretty smart at marketing though- they split out features some might find must haves to the higher model, while leaving the lower model still competitive against many other brands.



They're masters of segmentation but for potential customers it's quite demeaning. "We know the one feature that you want, but you're going to have to pay for the next tier up to get it. Because we're in charge."

Imagine if cameras were like cars, wherein you picked your base platform and then specified sensor, software features and connectivity modules. The price might be higher but at least it was due to *your* choices.


----------



## Whowe (Jul 18, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> This may be true, but unless something dramatic happens I'll never own anything but a mirrorless from here on out. I like them that much.


I agree, even though I don't own mirrorless, yet... (July 31 and counting...)

I was just pointing out that the R5 is not such a crazy high cost as some people keep saying or implying...


----------



## Whowe (Jul 18, 2020)

Traveler said:


> They addressed that in one of their Q&A Video right after the introduction (Rudy Winston I think). They said that on paper, the EF lenses will keep their CIPA rating but in the real world they’ll perform better in combination with the IBIS than without.


I agree. I believe I also heard a canon rep indicate that with EF lenses with IS, the lens IS would work as usual and the IBIS would work on 2 of the 5 axis. I assume those are the axis the lens IS can't control/adapt.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 18, 2020)

Whowe said:


> I agree. I believe I also heard a canon rep indicate that with EF lenses with IS, the lens IS would work as usual and the IBIS would work on 2 of the 5 axis. I assume those are the axis the lens IS can't control/adapt.



There's a whole thread about this: https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/i...em-to-be-all-over-the-board.38791/post-845085


----------



## AEWest (Jul 18, 2020)

Charbax said:


> I am not getting a Ninja V, I need unlimited 4K60 dual SD card video recording without any overheating internally. I have to stick to my Panasonic G9 with unlimited 4K60 hack on 1.2 firmware for now (even the AF isn't good enough) until something better comes along. Maybe the Sony A7S3 will be the one for me. Or maybe Sony or Canon soon come with an APS-C that has unlimited 4K60 to dual SD with perfect AF.. or perhaps the GH6/G10 will be the perfect camera upgrade for me. I consider myself pro videographer, I sometimes film 4-6 hours of long footage per day of filming with very short breaks between takes, and I can never have the risk of loosing all footage with an SD card loss/failure. I don't understand how any serious or semi-pro or pro videographer would even consider filming with an R6 that can record video to only one SD card slot. For example a wedding videographer who may lose footage to SD card corruption failure. It's unacceptable. Having to work around overheating and 30min limits is a total deal breaker for me. The Canon Full Frame range is not for me, not for now anyway.


It really sounds like you need a dedicated video camera and not a hybrid stills/video camera. Too many compromises in the latter.


----------



## Andy Westwood (Jul 18, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> It was somewhere, but I don't remember where exactly. Basically the IBIS will work with IS in EF lenses, but it won't be 'coordinated', so not as good as with RF lenses with IS.



This is interesting I found it on digitalcameraworld.com re IBIS on both R5 and R6 how the none IS 28-70 f/2 and 50 and 85 f1.2 get 8 and 7 stops of IBIS even thought the lenses don’t have IBIS.

No mention on various EF lenses but it looks like it will differ lens to lens

Lens Lens IS only Lens IS + in-body IS
RF 24-70mm f/2.8L 5 stops 8 stops
RF 24-105mm f/4L 5 stops 8 stops
RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 5 stops 8 stops
RF 28-70mm f/2L None 8 stops
RF 70-200mm f/2.8L 5 stops 8 stops
RF 85mm f1.2L None 8 stops
RF 15-35mm f/2.8L 5 stops  7 stops
RF 35mm f/1.8 Macro 5 stops 7 stops
RF 50mm f/1.2L None 7 stops
RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 5 stops 6.5 stops
RF 100-500mm f/4.5-5.6L 5 stops 6 stops


----------



## Lenscracker (Jul 18, 2020)

padam said:


> It is rated at the maximum of 8 stops (Actually better than some other lenses with IS)
> 
> You can see the table they provided about RF lenses here.
> https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-r6-initial-review/2


 I'm not sure I trust that report. It is from DPR not Canon. The chart where this information appears is contained in the paragraph about how well IBIS works with IS. It is easy for me to suspect that an exuberant reporter would lump all the new RF lenses together as having IS installed. I noticed that every other lens in that chart does have IS installed.


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 18, 2020)

Nothing to do with the thread , but can someone tell me how to add your kit on the bottom of the posts


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 18, 2020)

degos said:


> They're masters of segmentation but for potential customers it's quite demeaning. "We know the one feature that you want, but you're going to have to pay for the next tier up to get it. Because we're in charge."


Don't take it so personally - Canon is a business, not your friend.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 18, 2020)

Jasonmc89 said:


> Does anybody else wish there was just a few more MPs..? That is literally the only thing I’m unsure about as I do bird photography.
> 
> But then I look at the 1Dxiii and think everything will be fine..
> 
> ...



1DX birders that produce quality results are usually shooting huge glass with extenders.

I shoot almost exclusively wildlife. I didn't even consider the R6. I've done 20MP before and I can't afford 600mm F4 glass.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 18, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> Nothing to do with the thread , but can someone tell me how to add your kit on the bottom of the posts




Click on your name in the top right and choose 'signature'.


----------



## Andy Westwood (Jul 18, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> Nothing to do with the thread , but can someone tell me how to add your kit on the bottom of the posts


You’ll find it under Account Details and then in Signature if you want to get really fancy you can even add HTML tags to make the “L” red etc


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 18, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> Jared Polin was unboxing his R5/R6 today and his reviews are usually pretty thorough. He said it would probably take 2 weeks to do a thorough review. I don’t think you can expect more than high level at this point since most of the reviewers have only had the cameras a short time.




I can't watch him. He makes my skin crawl and WHY IS HE ALWAYS SHOUTING???


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jul 18, 2020)

Several of the landscape samples in the DPReview review look like they have slight motion blur @ 100% magnification (even more evident if you zoom to 200%). I wonder if there is some sort of firmware issue with IBIS since these were shot at decent settings like 1/125 @ f/11. If the R5 IBIS looks similar at 1:1, I'm going to stick with my R.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 18, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> 1DX birders that produce quality results are usually shooting huge glass with extenders.
> 
> I shoot almost exclusively wildlife. I didn't even consider the R6. I've done 20MP before and I can't afford 600mm F4 glass.


Or carry it.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 18, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> It's not so much a dislike for his personality. It is how animated and strange he sounds. It is difficult to explain, the best I do is say people with sensory issues and autism don't do well with someone shouting at you. Unless it is a policeman, police are supposed to shout.
> 
> And aye his content of on the 1DXIII was great, I really quite liked how in depth he went. But it was a bit more calm than the usual.


Don't disagree with you at all. I will only watch one of his videos if I am really invested in the subject. I managed software development for 13 years as one of my careers, so I have some immunity left over for "unique" personalities. My immunity is starting to fail. My gear is supposed to ship on 7/31, so I will be able to do my own test. I have a friend that raises/trains agility/discs dogs and I will setup a time with her to run through a few routines. Good subject to test tracking and shutter lag since I know what I can do with a 1dx II. Only problem is it is blazing hot in Georgia and we would have short window so as not to overheat the dogs.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 18, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> Only problem is it is blazing hot in Georgia and we would have short window so as not to overheat the dogs.


But at the bright side, it's a great chance to learn what overheats first, the dogs or the R5...


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 18, 2020)

highdesertmesa said:


> Several of the landscape samples in the DPReview review look like they have slight motion blur @ 100% magnification (even more evident if you zoom to 200%). I wonder if there is some sort of firmware issue with IBIS since these were shot at decent settings like 1/125 @ f/11. If the R5 IBIS looks similar at 1:1, I'm going to stick with my R.



Which ones exactly? I checked a few and they looked ok to me in jpeg. Sadly I couldn't check raw files as apparently adobe camera raw can't read them yet. Was too lazy to install Canon software.


----------



## esglord (Jul 18, 2020)

I want the AF II system, but for now I'll wait to see if EOS R and EOS R6 have a stills-oriented baby eventually.


----------



## Jasonmc89 (Jul 18, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> 1DX birders that produce quality results are usually shooting huge glass with extenders.
> 
> I shoot almost exclusively wildlife. I didn't even consider the R6. I've done 20MP before and I can't afford 600mm F4 glass.



My point exactly. But it’d be an awesome body for people pictures..


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 18, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> But at the bright side, it's a great chance to learn what overheats first, the dogs or the R5...


That is an easy one - the dogs. I don't shoot much video and especially not 8k on a hot day in Georgia!


----------



## padam (Jul 18, 2020)

Lenscracker said:


> I'm not sure I trust that report. It is from DPR not Canon. The chart where this information appears is contained in the paragraph about how well IBIS works with IS. It is easy for me to suspect that an exuberant reporter would lump all the new RF lenses together as having IS installed. I noticed that every other lens in that chart does have IS installed.


Nope, the 85mm f/1.2 also has 8 stops and no IS, they claim it is possible to take 2 sec exposures with it hand-held


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jul 18, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> Which ones exactly? I checked a few and they looked ok to me in jpeg. Sadly I couldn't check raw files as apparently adobe camera raw can't read them yet. Was too lazy to install Canon software.



I looked at them again just now – set my screen resolution to max and made sure I only zoomed in to 1:1 in PS – they look ok now I guess, but some look sharper than others to me (like the motel sign looks sharper than some of the shots of the fields). Maybe I'm just used to the resolution of the R and its weak AA filter.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 18, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Or carry it.


Yep - that's why I went 500mm rather than 600mm. My shooting buddy (ten years younger than me) shoots with the 600mm f/4, and _he never stops _moaning about the weight..!

__


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 18, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I’ll likely wait for another reviewer. I just seen one on the R5 posted in this thread that was good. *What I am after now is a proper written review and not another YouTube personality*. Jared Polin can be entertaining, but he can also be a lot of work to watch as he uses a lot of tone shifts and he is dreadfully excitable.




Then you need Bryan Carnathan (TDP) or CR Forum regular Dustin Abbott (at his own site and he also has a YouTube channel). Both excel at the overall review in the long-form format without hammering you with samples.

Though I believe both focus on stills usage. If you want to drill down on some aspect of video, I couldn't give you a recommendation as I just shoot stills.

- A


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 18, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I’ll likely wait for another reviewer. I just seen one on the R5 posted in this thread that was good. What I am after now is a proper written review and not another YouTube personality. Jared Polin can be entertaining, but he can also be a lot of work to watch as he uses a lot of tone shifts and he is dreadfully excitable.


I like his personality, and the fact that he is truly brand agnostic, certainly if something is junk, or great, he will say so! I also like that he posts downloadable RAW files. I really don’t like his style of processing his own shots though, way too much contrast, saturation and vibrancy, makes it difficult to see the actual image quality.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 18, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I can't watch him. He makes my skin crawl and WHY IS HE ALWAYS SHOUTING???




For me:
​1) I don't care about video so I generally only watch reviewers that focus on stills (or in Jordan and Chris's case, I just skip Jordan's content) .​​2) Faux shock jock radio talk show host voice = no thank you.​​3) Harps too much on the keeping up with the Joneses spec wars sort of culture. It gets the clicks, but I don't really benefit from it.​
...but few can deny he's working his tail off, building his brand and making some money. He's not some tastemaker influencer because he's cool and people want to look at him. He's busting hump to provide content that people (apparently) want to see. It's not at all for me, but good on him for building something people can use.

- A


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 18, 2020)

highdesertmesa said:


> Several of the landscape samples in the DPReview review look like they have slight motion blur @ 100% magnification (even more evident if you zoom to 200%). I wonder if there is some sort of firmware issue with IBIS since these were shot at decent settings like 1/125 @ f/11. If the R5 IBIS looks similar at 1:1, I'm going to stick with my R.


I'm not sure why you're ascribing what you see to the gear, when it's far more convincingly explained by user error.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 18, 2020)

padam said:


> Nope, the 85mm f/1.2 also has 8 stops and no IS, they claim it is possible to take 2 sec exposures with it hand-held




Claim and deliver are different things. I expect the IBIS to be good, but I always seem to see reviewers say 'I didn't quite get as much as they claimed, but the IS is still pretty good.'

I personally find the non-IS lenses getting more benefit than IS lenses pretty baffling. Seeing the RF 28-70 f/2L on the 8 stops IBIS list is bonkers. That's a ton of glass and weight to account for, so to make that claim one wonders how they pulled that off.

- A


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> For me:
> ​1) I don't care about video so I generally only watch reviewers that focus on stills (or in Jordan and Chris's case, I just skip Jordan's content) .​​2) Faux shock jock radio talk show host voice = no thank you.​​3) Harps too much on the keeping up with the Joneses spec wars sort of culture. It gets the clicks, but I don't really benefit from it.​
> ...but few can deny he's working his tail off, building his brand and making some money. He's not some tastemaker influencer because he's cool and people want to look at him. He's busting hump to provide content people (apparently) want to see. It's not at all for me, but good on him for building something people can use.
> 
> - A




I can't disagree with a word of this.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Claim and deliver are different things. I expect the IBIS to be good, but I always seem to see reviewers say 'I didn't quite get as much as they claimed, but the IS is still pretty good.'
> 
> I personally find the non-IS lenses getting more benefit than IS lenses pretty baffling. Seeing the RF 28-70 f/2L on the 8 stops IBIS list is bonkers. That's a ton of glass and weight to account for, so to make that claim one wonders how they pulled that off.
> 
> - A


Canon says the stops are determined using the CIPA standard and that the size of the image circle is the limiting factor.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 18, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> Canon says the stops are determined using the CIPA standard and that the size of the image circle is the limiting factor.


Which means the tilt shift lenses should be good for 15 stops


----------



## Kit. (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Claim and deliver are different things. I expect the IBIS to be good, but I always seem to see reviewers say 'I didn't quite get as much as they claimed, but the IS is still pretty good.'


Could depend on zoom/focus settings.



ahsanford said:


> I personally find the non-IS lenses getting more benefit than IS lenses pretty baffling. Seeing the RF 28-70 f/2L on the 8 stops IBIS list is bonkers. That's a ton of glass and weight to account for, so to make that claim one wonders how they pulled that off.


IBIS is not going to move _that_ weight. Should be the opposite, actually: the bigger the inertia of the camera plus the lens is, the easier it should be to compensate with IBIS.


----------



## marioslrzn (Jul 18, 2020)

Charbax said:


> I am not getting a Ninja V, I need unlimited 4K60 dual SD card video recording without any overheating internally. I have to stick to my Panasonic G9 with unlimited 4K60 hack on 1.2 firmware for now (even the AF isn't good enough) until something better comes along. Maybe the Sony A7S3 will be the one for me. Or maybe Sony or Canon soon come with an APS-C that has unlimited 4K60 to dual SD with perfect AF.. or perhaps the GH6/G10 will be the perfect camera upgrade for me. I consider myself pro videographer, I sometimes film 4-6 hours of long footage per day of filming with very short breaks between takes, and I can never have the risk of loosing all footage with an SD card loss/failure. I don't understand how any serious or semi-pro or pro videographer would even consider filming with an R6 that can record video to only one SD card slot. For example a wedding videographer who may lose footage to SD card corruption failure. It's unacceptable. Having to work around overheating and 30min limits is a total deal breaker for me. The Canon Full Frame range is not for me, not for now anyway.


Sounds Like the G9 is perfect for you, and if it works for you, then there’s no need to go to fullframe with the better video quality. Some people like that matrix look on the Panasonic , I just don’t like my videos looking like they’re all shot with a matrix LUTs


----------



## padam (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Claim and deliver are different things. I expect the IBIS to be good, but I always seem to see reviewers say 'I didn't quite get as much as they claimed, but the IS is still pretty good.'
> 
> I personally find the non-IS lenses getting more benefit than IS lenses pretty baffling. Seeing the RF 28-70 f/2L on the 8 stops IBIS list is bonkers. That's a ton of glass and weight to account for, so to make that claim one wonders how they pulled that off.
> 
> - A


It really isn't. If anything, the weight actually helps, that's why a lot of people prefer bigger and heavier cameras for filming.

If Sony rates its stabilisation at a maximum of 5.5 stops (without lens IS), and we know the Canon stabilisation is much more powerful with the faster communication of the RF mount and bigger image circle and mount diameter, then 8 stops with some lenses do no seem that far-fetched by the same standard.


----------



## marioslrzn (Jul 18, 2020)

degos said:


> They're masters of segmentation but for potential customers it's quite demeaning. "We know the one feature that you want, but you're going to have to pay for the next tier up to get it. Because we're in charge."
> 
> Imagine if cameras were like cars, wherein you picked your base platform and then specified sensor, software features and connectivity modules. The price might be higher but at least it was due to *your* choices.


You don’t think cars are like that? Ford F150 has like 6 different models, each with better features that you have to move up to get. What car available doesn’t have a base medium premium model? People want different things, and that’s why companies offer it. The r5 has everything you could want, but a lot of people don’t need all the features so R6 might offer 90 percent of what they want with the lesser cost. People forget, it’s your choice to buy it, if it doesn’t meet your needs, don’t buy it


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 18, 2020)

marioslrzn said:


> Sounds Like the G9 is perfect for you, and if it works for you, then there’s no need to go to fullframe with the better video quality. Some people like that matrix look on the Panasonic , I just don’t like my videos looking like they’re all shot with a matrix LUTs


As a pro videographer, why would you not be looking for a pro video camera?


----------



## marioslrzn (Jul 18, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> As a pro videographer, why would you not be looking for a pro video camera?


that’s what say, I just like laughing about people complaining about the shortcoming of a mirrorless camera,


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 18, 2020)

highdesertmesa said:


> I looked at them again just now – set my screen resolution to max and made sure I only zoomed in to 1:1 in PS – they look ok now I guess, but some look sharper than others to me (like the motel sign looks sharper than some of the shots of the fields). Maybe I'm just used to the resolution of the R and its weak AA filter.


If you noticed on the video, they had a lot of wind movement in the fields. He may not be shooting at a high enough shutter speed to compensate. IBIS doesn’t help if the subject is moving.


----------



## padam (Jul 18, 2020)

Further clarification on the IBIS ratings, with measured focal lengths given as well:


RF24-105mm F4 L IS USM105 mm8.0RF35mm F1.8 MACRO IS STM35 mm7.0RF24-70mm F2.8 L IS USM70 mm8.0RF15-35mm F2.8 L IS35 mm7.0RF24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM240 mm6.5RF70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM200 mm7.5RF24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM105 mm8.0RF100-500mm F4.5-7.1 L IS USM500 mm6.0RF85mm F2 MACRO IS STM85 mm8.0RF50mm F1.2 L USM50 mm7.0RF28-70mm F2 L USM70 mm8.0RF85mm F1.2 L USM85 mm8.0RF85mm F1.2 L USM DS85 mm8.0

f/11 DO lenses not supported (only 4-stop or 5-stop lens IS) as I wrote earlier.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Jul 18, 2020)

One thing I would like to see Canon comment on is whether we need lens firmware updates to fully enable the dual IS. I have seen some posts on this in videos but have not been able to find anything official from Canon.

To me this makes sense because all my lenses are from pre R5/R6. Canon has had to update the firmware on the R and RP to fully support the lenses that came after the bodies were released.

So unless these early reviews are also getting firmware updates for the lens we may yet still see more improvement.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Then you need Bryan Carnathan (TDP) or CR Forum regular Dustin Abbott (at his own site and he also has a YouTube channel). Both excel at the overall review in the long-form format without hammering you with samples.
> 
> Though I believe both focus on stills usage. If you want to drill down on some aspect of video, I couldn't give you a recommendation as I just shoot stills.
> 
> - A


Bryan and Dustin are both good.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 18, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Which means the tilt shift lenses should be good for 15 stops


The baffles in the current adapters will limit the circle a lot


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 18, 2020)

There seems to be a few videos being put up on You Tube that are claiming to be footage from the R5 and R6 , apparently they are using videos from older Sony cameras , and have set up YouTube channels pretending to be Tech companies , I have seen 3 videos now .


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jul 18, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> If you noticed on the video, they had a lot of wind movement in the fields. He may not be shooting at a high enough shutter speed to compensate. IBIS doesn’t help if the subject is moving.



Makes sense, but I was also seeing it on the manmade object in the fields. Probably I'm just not used to 20mp vs 30mp. Also I'm shooting the RF 28-70, RF 50, and RF 70-200 from wide open to maybe f/8 max – so the shots using the 24-105 at f/11 might not match up.

Could also be the wind moving the photographer's body one direction at the same time as it's catching the end of the lens hood and moving the camera a different way could interfere with the IBIS calculations.


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jul 18, 2020)

Ramage said:


> One thing I would like to see Canon comment on is whether we need lens firmware updates to fully enable the dual IS. I have seen some posts on this in videos but have not been able to find anything official from Canon.
> 
> To me this makes sense because all my lenses are from pre R5/R6. Canon has had to update the firmware on the R and RP to fully support the lenses that came after the bodies were released.
> 
> So unless these early reviews are also getting firmware updates for the lens we may yet still see more improvement.



I do remember reading (or seeing on YouTube) that we need lens firmware updates for it all to work right. But the kits delivered with the 24-105 probably already have it. Not sure if this review was done with a 24-105 from a kit or one they already had. Could be their IBIS/IS combo on the 24-105 was working with IBIS-only.


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 18, 2020)

Ramage said:


> One thing I would like to see Canon comment on is whether we need lens firmware updates to fully enable the dual IS. I have seen some posts on this in videos but have not been able to find anything official from Canon.
> 
> To me this makes sense because all my lenses are from pre R5/R6. Canon has had to update the firmware on the R and RP to fully support the lenses that came after the bodies were released.
> 
> So unless these early reviews are also getting firmware updates for the lens we may yet still see more improvement.


I spoke to Canon and they said that there will be firmware coming out for lenses like the 28-70 F2 to activate the IS , apparently there is a chip in the lenses and camera body that talk to each other to give you the IS range


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jul 18, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> I spoke to Canon and they said that there will be firmware coming out for lenses like the 28-70 F2 to activate the IS , apparently there is a chip in the lenses and camera body that talk to each other to give you the IS range



Right, so if DPReview was using a 24-105 they already had, chances are we're not seeing ideal IBIS/IS at work in the results.


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 18, 2020)

highdesertmesa said:


> Right, so if DPReview was using a 24-105 they already had, chances are we're not seeing ideal IBIS/IS at work in the results.


Probably not , certain lenses will not have the full IS working at the moment , it will be coming around about the same time as they go out for delivery to the public .


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 18, 2020)

When I asked Canon UK if it was true that the 28-70 F2 will have 8 stops of IS this was their response ..

"Hi, this matches the information we have (the notes say you will need a firmware update which will be available after launch). These figures are in line with CIPA testing and may be going through final validation, but this may be information available on the website when the support pages are live to confirm. Thanks."

So the chances are there will be other lenses that need a firmware update also .


----------



## highdesertmesa (Jul 18, 2020)

Richard Anthony said:


> Probably not , certain lenses will not have the full IS working at the moment , it will be coming around about the same time as they go out for delivery to the public .



Thanks, so until the lens firmware updates are released, we can pretty much discount all the reports of how long people can hand-hold with the IBIS unless they're using a kit lens (firmware should be updated) or EF lens (won't ever have an update).


----------



## Richard Anthony (Jul 18, 2020)

highdesertmesa said:


> Thanks, so until the lens firmware updates are released, we can pretty much discount all the reports of how long people can hand-hold with the IBIS unless they're using a kit lens (firmware should be updated) or EF lens (won't ever have an update).


Yes for now , not sure on the EF lenses sorry , but if the EF lenses have IS built into them , then I should imagine they will work just fine with the IBIS in the cameras .


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 18, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Then you need Bryan Carnathan (TDP) or CR Forum regular Dustin Abbott (at his own site and he also has a YouTube channel). Both excel at the overall review in the long-form format without hammering you with samples.
> 
> Though I believe both focus on stills usage. If you want to drill down on some aspect of video, I couldn't give you a recommendation as I just shoot stills.
> 
> - A



Thank you for the links, the other issue with Youtube is a overall focus on video. I will maybe turn the video feature on once. I am most excited to see how the R5 does with the 100-500mm @ 400mm and 500mm to compare it to the the existing Nikon D850 with the 500mm PF and the upcoming 100-400 S lens. Basically I want to see how these combinations will compare. I know the Nikon 500mm PF will likely be the sharpest and fastest, but it still feels like investing in 'old tech'. I also need to rent a few combinations to see what the size and weight of all of them feel like. I am just back from a 16Km hike and my Z6 felt like nothing but only 6Km with my Canon 5DII and 300mm f/2.8 feels like pain. 

I was all in the mood for a 200-400 f/4 + 1DXIII until I started walking to the places I want to shoot.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 18, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> Don't disagree with you at all. I will only watch one of his videos if I am really invested in the subject. I managed software development for 13 years as one of my careers, so I have some immunity left over for "unique" personalities. My immunity is starting to fail. My gear is supposed to ship on 7/31, so I will be able to do my own test. I have a friend that raises/trains agility/discs dogs and I will setup a time with her to run through a few routines. Good subject to test tracking and shutter lag since I know what I can do with a 1dx II. Only problem is it is blazing hot in Georgia and we would have short window so as not to overheat the dogs.



My tolerance for people is really low. Though Youtube is a little easier than real life, real life is bloody hard when I am mute sometimes or that person at the shop keeps insisting I can talk to her when my fiancé has told her no. But aye, I like watching a nice quiet review. Youtube videos are also getting really weird, like watching a 40s/50s TV show where you expect them to start telling you about how smooth the cigs from their sponsor taste.

I'll add, just to clarify. I really don't feel any ill will to the man. No one deserves that. I just can't handle tone changes and loud things.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 18, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> Thank you for the links, the other issue with Youtube is a overall focus on video. I will maybe turn the video feature on once. I am most excited to see how the R5 does with the 100-500mm @ 400mm and 500mm to compare it to the the existing Nikon D850 with the 500mm PF and the upcoming 100-400 S lens. Basically I want to see how these combinations will compare. I know the Nikon 500mm PF will likely be the sharpest and fastest, but it still feels like investing in 'old tech'. I also need to rent a few combinations to see what the size and weight of all of them feel like. I am just back from a 16Km hike and my Z6 felt like nothing but only 6Km with my Canon 5DII and 300mm f/2.8 feels like pain.
> 
> I was all in the mood for a 200-400 f/4 + 1DXIII until I started walking to the places I want to shoot.


I have/had that combination and did a 6 mile hike with a stripped down pack down a stream in Alaska In 2015. I am older but strong and it is a lot of weight. I sold both items last week and placed orders for the R5/R6 + 100-500. I will buy back into the 200 - 400 if Canon puts it on the 600 III weight loss program and delivers an RF f4 version. They seem to have a new DO technology that may help reduce both cost and weight. Fantastic safari lens, and as sharp as any of the big whites Primes. I did order the 800 mm F 11 to test, but I suspect it will be returned.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 18, 2020)

marioslrzn said:


> You don’t think cars are like that? Ford F150 has like 6 different models, each with better features that you have to move up to get. What car available doesn’t have a base medium premium model? People want different things, and that’s why companies offer it. *The r5 has everything you could want*, but a lot of people don’t need all the features so R6 might offer 90 percent of what they want with the lesser cost. People forget, it’s your choice to buy it, if it doesn’t meet your needs, don’t buy it




Generally agree except for the blue part. The R5 is not the top tier -- it's just the top tier right now in a budding platform. It's the 5D 'all around really strong' camera body, but some folks want specialist hardware, like an integral grip 1-series body, an extreme detail high res body, etc.

There will be R mount cameras priced above the R5 before too long.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 18, 2020)

padam said:


> It really isn't. If anything, the weight actually helps, that's why a lot of people prefer bigger and heavier cameras for filming.




I recall getting lens IS to work in the EF 85 f/1.4L IS took some act of god to put in a comically large IS setup (like from a supertele) to handle the glass movements involved. 

But somehow a 28-70 f/2 without anything of the sort is an easier monster to stabilize?

I don't disagree with you -- I just don't understand. Is a floating sensor and superfast communications that much of a game changer for stabilization? Please help me understand what's happening here. I've read very little on IBIS.

Thx
- A


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 18, 2020)

degos said:


> They're masters of segmentation but for potential customers it's quite demeaning. "We know the one feature that you want, but you're going to have to pay for the next tier up to get it. Because we're in charge."
> 
> Imagine if cameras were like cars, wherein you picked your base platform and then specified sensor, software features and connectivity modules. The price might be higher but at least it was due to *your* choices.




I’ve never been ‘demeaned’ by any type of purchase. Either it’s what I want or it isn’t. If it costs more to get the features I want then it’s my decision whether or not I buy it - I think that means I’m in charge instead of the other way around.

Good luck buying a car with navigation that doesn’t have leather - see what I mean?

A company couldn’t survive doing ala carte..


----------



## navastronia (Jul 19, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Claim and deliver are different things. I expect the IBIS to be good, but I always seem to see reviewers say 'I didn't quite get as much as they claimed, but the IS is still pretty good.'
> 
> I personally find the non-IS lenses getting more benefit than IS lenses pretty baffling. Seeing the RF 28-70 f/2L on the 8 stops IBIS list is bonkers. That's a ton of glass and weight to account for, so to make that claim one wonders how they pulled that off.
> 
> - A



I read a few days ago (and don't have the source on me) that this is because the 28-70/2 and the 85/1.2 both have larger image circles than other lenses, which helps Canon's IBIS system generate better results.

EDIT: someone already said this


----------



## navastronia (Jul 19, 2020)

Ramage said:


> One thing I would like to see Canon comment on is whether we need lens firmware updates to fully enable the dual IS. I have seen some posts on this in videos but have not been able to find anything official from Canon.
> 
> To me this makes sense because all my lenses are from pre R5/R6. Canon has had to update the firmware on the R and RP to fully support the lenses that came after the bodies were released.
> 
> So unless these early reviews are also getting firmware updates for the lens we may yet still see more improvement.



I found the posted video where the Canon rep talks IBIS and lens OIS confusing for a related reason. The host claims that only RF glass allows IBIS and OIS to "coordinate," but also claims that IBIS and OIS will still work in tandem with non-RF glass adapted to the cameras.

What gives?


----------



## padam (Jul 19, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> I recall getting lens IS to work in the EF 85 f/1.4L IS took some act of god to put in a comically large IS setup (like from a supertele) to handle the glass movements involved.
> 
> But somehow a 28-70 f/2 without anything of the sort is an easier monster to stabilize?
> 
> ...


They are giving the quoted figures for still images, where the aim is to simply keep the image as still as possible. And with lenses not longer than 85mm, the IBIS alone may do a very good job with that as long as the setup is quite steady to start with. Yes this IBIS seems more powerful than an 85mm f/1.4 IS in the lens, which is admittedly older technology.
Even though there IS in some RF lenses as well, it might not be able to push this 8-stop figure any further, than what the IBIS can do all by itself in the optimal configuration.

On the other hand, the stabilisation probably works differently in video, where there is camera movement and the aim is different (make it more natural, less jittery), where it is probably good to have lens stabilisation as well as the IBIS or even some digital IS might be helpful, too.
Without actual tests it is hard to judge.




navastronia said:


> I found the posted video where the Canon rep talks IBIS and lens OIS confusing for a related reason. The host claims that only RF glass allows IBIS and OIS to "coordinate," but also claims that IBIS and OIS will still work in tandem with non-RF glass adapted to the cameras.
> 
> What gives?


What they probably mean is that for non-RF lenses it is not a Dual Sensing IS system (as shown on that graph), there is no back and forth communication with the processor and the two gyro sensors in the lens and the body, just adds a bit of extra support to the optical IS in the EF lens. (While they claim they provide the same quoted figures for the amount of stops, it may still be better as it might correct for more axis)

It is not clear to me, what happens with EF lenses without an IS, but I guess with RF lenses it works much better.

Maybe in the 5D Mark V, they will do an IBIS specifically optimised for EF lenses, just like Sony did with the A-mount A99II in comparison to the E-mount A7RII


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 19, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I’ve never been ‘demeaned’ by any type of purchase. Either it’s what I want or it isn’t. If it costs more to get the features I want then it’s my decision whether or not I buy it - I think that means I’m in charge instead of the other way around.


Yep.

It always amazes me how _personally_ people take a camera company's decisions - it isn't your friend, and it owes you _absolutely nothing_ - and as you rightly say, we have the final say here: we buy or we don't.

I can't decide whether it's arrogance or immaturity that makes people think that Canon (or anyone else) is obligated to build them their own perfect camera, but entitlement is a tiresome, irritating _and depressingly pervasive_, personality trait.

_Nobody is that important._


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 19, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> I have/had that combination and did a 6 mile hike with a stripped down pack down a stream in Alaska In 2015. I am older but strong and it is a lot of weight. I sold both items last week and placed orders for the R5/R6 + 100-500. I will buy back into the 200 - 400 if Canon puts it on the 600 III weight loss program and delivers an RF f4 version. They seem to have a new DO technology that may help reduce both cost and weight. Fantastic safari lens, and as sharp as any of the big whites Primes. I did order the 800 mm F 11 to test, but I suspect it will be returned.


I have not yet seen a DO or PF zoom. At least not a professional lens. I think we’ll see a 500mm f/4 do L first as that is the oldest of the big white.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2020)

degos said:


> They're masters of segmentation but for potential customers it's quite demeaning. "We know the one feature that you want, but you're going to have to pay for the next tier up to get it. Because we're in charge."
> 
> Imagine if cameras were like cars, wherein you picked your base platform and then specified sensor, software features and connectivity modules. The price might be higher but at least it was due to *your* choices.


But isn't it just like cars? Extra features on cars these days are mostly sold in options "packages". Sometimes one has to choose gaining something over losing something else when purchasing a car. Sometimes one has to purchase a whole option's package to get the one feature one wants. Sounds exactly like cars to me. They are all labeled Canon (Mustang), but have differing levels of features for a different price. I can order a Mustang Saleen, but then I might have to give up cloth seats (I prefer) for leather (I don't like) just to have the engine/transmission/suspension package I want. Heck, even the air fryer I have comes with different features at different prices. The, why are some Hot Wheels $.94 and then some are $7.99?


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 19, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I have not yet seen a DO or PF zoom. At least not a professional lens. I think we’ll see a 500mm f/4 do L first as that is the oldest of the big white.


I hope you are correct. Based on what they did with the 400 & 600 III + move to DO they should be able to reduce weight. I don’t think they will be able to reduce quite as much as the III’s percent wise since they took out quite a bit with the 500 II. I would even be happy with an f5,6 as long as IQ wasL quality.


----------



## koch1948 (Jul 19, 2020)

ahsanford said:


> Generally agree except for the blue part. The R5 is not the top tier -- it's just the top tier right now in a budding platform. It's the 5D 'all around really strong' camera body, but some folks want specialist hardware, like an integral grip 1-series body, an extreme detail high res body, etc.
> 
> There will be R mount cameras priced above the R5 before too long.
> 
> - A


Priced above will be the R5 high MP version and the 1DXIII equivalent...... Maybe these will be named the EOS R5s and EOS R1. My guess is the high MP EOS R5 version may not be that far off, but the flagship "R" equivalent to the EOS-1D X Mark III could be late fall 2021 at the earliest and possibly into 2022.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Jul 19, 2020)

navastronia said:


> I found the posted video where the Canon rep talks IBIS and lens OIS confusing for a related reason. The host claims that only RF glass allows IBIS and OIS to "coordinate," but also claims that IBIS and OIS will still work in tandem with non-RF glass adapted to the cameras.
> 
> What gives?



I saw that video too. 

That makes me wonder if IBIS will work with another brand lens that has no stabilization. 
I'm not asking if the body and another brand lens will communicate.
What I am asking is, will there be any difference with IBIS turned on and then turned off - both times with a non Canon non stabilized lens?


----------



## navastronia (Jul 19, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> I saw that video too.
> 
> That makes me wonder if IBIS will work with another brand lens that has no stabilization.
> I'm not asking if the body and another brand lens will communicate.
> What I am asking is, will there be any difference with IBIS turned on and then turned off - both times with a non Canon non stabilized lens?



I think the answer to that question has to be "yes," if only because if it isn't, Canon is severely handicapping any photographer, and especially filmmaker (IBIS is a critical part of handheld filmmaking for anyone who doesn't own a gimbal), who doesn't pony up for RF glass.


----------



## exige24 (Jul 19, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> That was a lovely review. Though a lot of the time I kept thinking about how massive the 85mm f/1.2 looks on the R5 and how much bigger it was on the R. It is like Canon's lens designers where completely out of step with the body designers. Nikon's f/1.8's are all slower and less exciting, but they live up to the smaller mirrorless system.


I'd take the Canon 85 1.2 over the "mirrorless" Nikkon 1.8 even if it were twice as large. What a joke of a lens. I'm taking pictures not losing weight. Haha


----------



## Baron_Karza (Jul 19, 2020)

navastronia said:


> I think the answer to that question has to be "yes," if only because if it isn't, Canon is severely handicapping any photographer, and especially filmmaker (IBIS is a critical part of handheld filmmaking for anyone who doesn't own a gimbal), who doesn't pony up for RF glass.



I hope so. The way the official Canon videos explain it makes me wonder. There's one that says something like: "It will still stabilize with *non IS* EF lens with the adapter because the camera and the lens speak natively the same language". Will, for example, a Tamron lens with non-VC lens mounted on an R5/R6 still allow the body alone to benefit from IBIS? Does the Tamron speak the correct native language?


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2020)

navastronia said:


> I think the answer to that question has to be "yes," if only because if it isn't, Canon is severely handicapping any photographer, and especially filmmaker (IBIS is a critical part of handheld filmmaking for anyone who doesn't own a gimbal), who doesn't pony up for RF glass.


It will work as long as the camera knows the focal length of the lens. If the third party lens has electronics, then it reports that focal length to the camera. The question is: Do MF lenses with no electronics work with IBIS in a canon camera? In the case of Olympus, there is the ability to manually enter the focal length of the non-electronic lens into the camera for the sake of IBIS precision. Does the Canon have that feature? That remains to be seen, however, even without entering that focal length into my Olympus, the IBIS still works well. It is most important with longer focal lengths, in my opinion.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 19, 2020)

koch1948 said:


> Priced above will be the R5 high MP version and the 1DXIII equivalent...... Maybe these will be named the EOS R5s and EOS R1. My guess is the high MP EOS R5 version may not be that far off, but the flagship "R" equivalent to the EOS-1D X Mark III could be late fall 2021 at the earliest and possibly into 2022.


Depending on where the R1 is in the development cycle, they may announce prior to the Olympics with copies in the hands of select photographers.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> I hope so. The way the official Canon videos explain it makes me wonder. There's one that says something like: "It will still stabilize with *non IS* EF lens with the adapter because the camera and the lens speak natively the same language". Will, for example, a Tamron lens with non-VC lens mounted on an R5/R6 still allow the body alone to benefit from IBIS? Does the Tamron speak the correct native language?


It will work as long as the camera knows the focal length of the lens. If the third party lens has electronics, then it reports that focal length to the camera. The question is: Do MF lenses with no electronics work with IBIS in a canon camera? In the case of Olympus, there is the ability to manually enter the focal length of the non-electronic lens into the camera for the sake of IBIS precision. Does the Canon have that feature? That remains to be seen, however, even without entering that focal length into my Olympus, the IBIS still works well. It is most important with longer focal lengths, in my opinion. My Tamron VC lens reports to my R. The camera knows which lens is mounted. I see no reason why a non-VC lens wouldn't.


----------



## exige24 (Jul 19, 2020)

padam said:


> Understood. Ultimately, it always comes down to personal preference.
> It did take me quite a long time to set it up (I still think I can set it up even better), but it felt right in the hands from the first time, better than the 6D II.
> I find it more responsive than the Sony, which wakes up slower from standby and there is a slight lag with the controls that is absent on the R. The touch screen is just easy to use, these are just some things that don't show at all in the spec sheets.
> While I do prefer the OVF as well, I just can't be confident about getting the focus and there are some RF lenses which represent good value, like the 24-105L or the 35/1.8, and the list will keep growing but yes I definitely think it is geared more towards people who like f/1.2 primes or f/2 zooms (or f/2.8 holy trinity zooms with image stabilisation) _while the Sony is best at keeping everything as compact as possible._



Such a tired desire. It's even worse than "Who cares?"


----------



## canonnews (Jul 19, 2020)

degos said:


> They're masters of segmentation but for potential customers it's quite demeaning. "We know the one feature that you want, but you're going to have to pay for the next tier up to get it. Because we're in charge."
> 
> Imagine if cameras were like cars, wherein you picked your base platform and then specified sensor, software features and connectivity modules. The price might be higher but at least it was due to *your* choices.


sure .. if you want a camera where the buy-in is over 10K I'm sure they could do it.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 19, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I'll add, just to clarify. I really don't feel any ill will to the man. No one deserves that. I just can't handle tone changes and loud things.


Same here. I think the emotions and expressions help Jared earn more subscribers but I can't handle it either. There's sometimes useful information in his channel as it gets pre-production and pre-release gear, but I can't watch him all the time.

The latest unboxing video of the R5 and R6 was completely useless though as it wasn't followed by any actual shooting (at least in the studio) and image analysis. Although in general Jared doesn't go deep into technicalities and scientific-like image comparison, and maybe it's good for him as he simply doesn't understand those things. TonyN, for example, doesn't understand and still talks which results in disastrous profanation.


----------



## canonnews (Jul 19, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> It will work as long as the camera knows the focal length of the lens. If the third party lens has electronics, then it reports that focal length to the camera. The question is: Do MF lenses with no electronics work with IBIS in a canon camera? In the case of Olympus, there is the ability to manually enter the focal length of the non-electronic lens into the camera for the sake of IBIS precision. Does the Canon have that feature? That remains to be seen, however, even without entering that focal length into my Olympus, the IBIS still works well. It is most important with longer focal lengths, in my opinion. My Tamron VC lens reports to my R. The camera knows which lens is mounted. I see no reason why a non-VC lens wouldn't.


it's alot more than that. the camera also knows the image circle size that the lens projects, at all focals if it's a zoom. the camera also knows the vignetting and CA qualities as well. there was a ton of patent work done on this .. and it's surprising the level of detail it seems the RF cameras know about the lenses.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2020)

canonnews said:


> it's alot more than that. the camera also knows the image circle size that the lens projects, at all focals if it's a zoom. the camera also knows the vignetting and CA qualities as well. there was a ton of patent work done on this .. and it's surprising the level of detail it seems the RF cameras know about the lenses.


True, though I doubt the RF cameras know anything at all about the image circle of a 50 year old non-electronic Takumar.


----------



## degos (Jul 19, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> I can't decide whether it's arrogance or immaturity that makes people think that Canon (or anyone else) is obligated to build them their own perfect camera, but entitlement is a tiresome, irritating _and depressingly pervasive_, personality trait.



It's neither arrogance or immaturity, it's frustration.

They're not obligated to build the perfect camera but if they want to continue to sell cameras in a shrinking market with sharper competition then they need to address the specific requirements of discerning users. 

I'm still using a 1DX and 1DS3 because Canon have failed to produce anything compelling enough for me to buy in the past nine years. Looks like that will continue for another generation. 

If Canon or anyone else wants our money they have to damn well earn it. That's not entitlement, that's the market.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 19, 2020)

degos said:


> It's neither arrogance or immaturity, it's frustration.
> 
> They're not obligated to build the perfect camera but if they want to continue to sell cameras in a shrinking market with sharper competition then they need to address the specific requirements of discerning users.
> 
> ...


Based on the current backlog of orders for the new cameras, it appears the market has spoken. 

Obviously these cameras won't suit everybody's needs, but they seem to hit the sweet spot for many photographers.


----------



## fingerstein (Jul 19, 2020)

After all they are interested to sell cameras. Not to destroy them. Their task is to talk about all issues in a ballanced fashion, but this doesn't mean they don't need an income from selling cameras through afilliated links.


----------



## padam (Jul 19, 2020)

exige24 said:


> Such a tired desire. It's even worse than "Who cares?"


I think plenty of people, that was a core reason to switch to mirrorless in the first place.
Some might not be happy about a 28-70mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.2 being significantly bigger and heavier than the 24-70mm f/2.8 50mm f/1.2 lenses that they've used before (but they are superior, as they should be)
The RF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lens is unique in the RF world, because it is also significantly lighter and smaller while being even sharper, and some people are willing to pay for that privilege (even if it comes as an external zoom with a longer throw).
There will be more small lenses of course, but for people specifically looking for that, the RF system might not be the best right now.

A lot of people intend to mount these small cameras on gimbals to use for video, and again, the smaller, lighter, more balanced (maybe not bad to have more weight towards the back), the better.

Also, IBIS is big thing with these bodies and RF glass is the best choice for it, but they still need more native lenses, although they are addressing that in a rather timely manner, they have certainly caught up with specs in the mid-range category, they are only missing the 'true' flagship mirrorless camera and a high-megapixel model, which are under development.


----------



## Antonis (Jul 19, 2020)

The biggest negative to me seems to be battery life.


----------



## padam (Jul 19, 2020)

Antonis said:


> The biggest negative to me seems to be battery life.











Addressing Canon EOS R Battery Life


Addressing Canon EOS R Battery Life — The-Digital-Picture.com




www.the-digital-picture.com





I expect the same to hold true for the R5 and R6 and the battery life to be good enough with the newer battery, of course video will probably drain it faster.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 19, 2020)

exige24 said:


> I'd take the Canon 85 1.2 over the "mirrorless" Nikkon 1.8 even if it were twice as large. What a joke of a lens. I'm taking pictures not losing weight. Haha



For me it depends on what I am shooting. Even with a R5 and 100-500 in my future, i could still see me taking the Z6 and 1.8 primes on holiday. It is like a little point and shoot you use when your big camera is too much.


----------



## Charbax (Jul 19, 2020)

AEWest said:


> It really sounds like you need a dedicated video camera and not a hybrid stills/video camera. Too many compromises in the latter.


Is there a 4k60 unlimited camcorder (preferably 10bit 422 HLG HEVC to dual SD cards) with sensor at least micro43 size priced below $3k that I don't know about?


----------



## Charbax (Jul 19, 2020)

marioslrzn said:


> Sounds Like the G9 is perfect for you, and if it works for you, then there’s no need to go to fullframe with the better video quality. Some people like that matrix look on the Panasonic , I just don’t like my videos looking like they’re all shot with a matrix LUTs


The G9/GH5 would be perfect if it had Dual Pixel AF or Sony PDAF performance and officially supported unlimited recording without me having to hack it on US/Asia 1.2 firmware to have unlimited 4K60 recording. 10bit 422 HLG HEVC internally at 4K60 would be a nice upgrade too.


----------



## SteB1 (Jul 19, 2020)

padam said:


> I think one clarification is missing from Canon: how well does the IBIS work with EF lenses? (or fully manual lenses, but let's not go into that, they want to sell Canon lenses primarily)
> 
> They have given stabilisation ratings for all the RF lenses (the f/11 DO RF-mount primes *will not work* in conjunction with IBIS due to technical reasons, so only providing 5 or 4 stops in lens stabilisation)
> Will they provide the same data for their EF lenses?


This is what I'm wondering about. The difference in compensation available is apparently based on the image circle covered. So the IBIS must somehow detect the lens image circle covered and move in a narrower circle. Not sure how this will work with Canon EF lenses, none Canon EF fit lenses and say manual lenses, which may be adapted from other mounts.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 19, 2020)

exige24 said:


> I'd take the Canon 85 1.2 over the "mirrorless" Nikkon 1.8 even if it were twice as large. What a joke of a lens. I'm taking pictures not losing weight. Haha



Why would be a joke of a lens? It's a very good lens and lightweight. For most of the situations 1.8 is more than enough aperture and weight saving can be very valuable when traveling light(er). Nikon will have a brighter version too just like they will have an 50 1.2 soon.

Canon also made a joke lens recently, the 85 F2.


----------



## BeenThere (Jul 19, 2020)

Antonis said:


> The biggest negative to me seems to be battery life.


But an easily overcome negative by carrying an extra battery or two.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2020)

BeenThere said:


> But an easily overcome negative by carrying an extra battery or two.


People complained about the R battery life too. I am sure it affects some people. On 7/17 I shot 649 full size raw photos out on the lake with a single battery and it still shows 2/3 full. I didn't turn the camera off the whole time (two hours). So for me, battery life is not an issue at all.


----------



## AEWest (Jul 19, 2020)

Charbax said:


> Is there a 4k60 unlimited camcorder (preferably 10bit 422 HLG HEVC to dual SD cards) with sensor at least micro43 size priced below $3k that I don't know about?


Maybe not, but you get what you pay for. It seems you want a top spec video camera but don't want to pay for it. If I were a pro videographer and filmed 6 hours a day I would invest in the proper tools for my livelihood. Or else make due with the limitations the current less expensive equipment has.

I myself would love to have a 400 BHP sportscar with carbon ceramic brakes, leather interior, sat nav and top stereo for under $30K. But that ain't happening.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> People complained about the R battery life too. I am sure it affects some people. On 7/17 I shot 649 full size raw photos out on the lake with a single battery and it still shows 2/3 full. I didn't turn the camera off the whole time (two hours). So for me, battery life is not an issue at all.


What lens were you using? I get only a few hundred shots from my 5DIV attached to a telephoto lens.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> What lens were you using? I get only a few hundred shots from my 5DIV attached to a telephoto lens.


EF 135mm f/2L


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> EF 135mm f/2L


It doesn't have IS? I get terrible battery life on every camera of every make I have! Maybe it's composing shots with battery draining IS?


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Maybe it's composing shots with battery draining IS?



The IS does drain the battery, especially the IS in the heavy long lenses. I think there's even a warning about it somewhere in the Canon manual(s). The IS starts working when you half-press the shutter button and stops shortly after you release it.
So _composing_ with the IS on should be avoided, but if you need to focus and shoot, there's no choice.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> It doesn't have IS? I get terrible battery life on every camera of every make I have! Maybe it's composing shots with battery draining IS?


No. No IS. I used to get a whole lot of shots from my 5D Mark III with the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. I used it at a fashion show and got over 1800 shots before having to switch out the battery. That's with me chimping all the time.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> No. No IS. I used to get a whole lot of shots from my 5D Mark III with the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. I used it at a fashion show and got over 1800 shots before having to switch out the battery. That's with me chimping all the time.


The 5DIII has much better battery life than then 5DIV (well, mine did and I've heard the same from others here).


----------



## Charbax (Jul 19, 2020)

AEWest said:


> you get what you pay for. It seems you want a top spec video camera but don't want to pay for it.



I just want 2017-grade GH5 or 2018-grade Panasonic G9 (incl official unlimited recording) features but with a Canon or Sony autofocus technology. You can buy a second hand GH5/G9 at sub-$700 now. It's been 3 and a half years now since the Panasonic GH5 came out, is it really too much to ask for Canon and Sony to match the features on one of their 2020-grade APS-C or Full Frame camera? And to expect that Canon/Sony might match the features at less than 400% the current resale price of a GH5/G9 camera?

By matching features, I might expect those slightly exceeded, that is not just 8bit 4:2:0 H264 when doing unlimited "uncropped" 4K60, but actually able to do the unlimited 4K60 in 10bit 4:2:2 to HLG HDR format YouTube-ready in HEVC H265.


----------



## YuengLinger (Jul 19, 2020)

I have to chuckle when I hear people saying they want the better body build of the R5. While I'm sure that in fact it is somewhat sturdier, I would be less heartbroken dropping an R6 off a tall tripod onto rocks then an R5. The R6 would cost less to replace if the drop resulted in a totaled body. Weather Sealing is more debatable, more understandable, for those who really take their gear out in inclement conditions. But again, because weather sealing only goes so far, the idea of being able to save $1,500 on a body that might end up completely soaked or even dropped in water, seems to offset the argument about paying more for the R5 because of body strength. There might be a lot of reasons to buy the R5, but for most event and portrait photographers, body build doesn't seem to be a very big factor.

Maybe I am overestimating how well-built the R6 actually is. And, again, I'm sure that the R5 is put together a little more in mind with landscape and wildlife situations. But I sure wouldn't make my decision based solely on which camera is built better.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 19, 2020)

Charbax said:


> I just want 2017-grade GH5 or 2018-grade Panasonic G9 (incl official unlimited recording) features but with a Canon or Sony autofocus technology. You can buy a second hand GH5/G9 at sub-$700 now. It's been 3 and a half years now since the Panasonic GH5 came out, is it really too much to ask for Canon and Sony to match the features on one of their 2020-grade APS-C or Full Frame camera? And to expect that Canon/Sony might match the features at less than 400% the current resale price of a GH5 camera?


It depends on if you appreciate what you are asking for really. A ff sensor returning the same video specs as a sensor one quarter the size is not a small thing, readout speeds have to be twice as fast at a minimum, heat mitigation has to be four times better, etc etc. So when you ask for something 'as good' what you are actually asking for is something at least two to four times better.


----------



## briangus (Jul 19, 2020)

AlanF said:


> The 5DIII has much better battery life than then 5DIV (well, mine did and I've heard the same from others here).


Shot a music festival last year, gripped 5D4 and 200 F2 and a gripped EOSR with RF85 F1.2
Just over 1600 shots on both but had to swap batteries out on the 5D4 after about 900 shots
Still life in the R's batteries a few days later


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 19, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I have to chuckle when I hear people saying they want the better body build of the R5. While I'm sure that in fact it is somewhat sturdier, I would be less heartbroken dropping an R6 off a tall tripod onto rocks then an R5. The R6 would cost less to replace if the drop resulted in a totaled body. Weather Sealing is more debatable, more understandable, for those who really take their gear out in inclement conditions. But again, because weather ceiling only goes so far, the idea of being able to save $1,500 on a body that might end up completely soaked or even dropped in water, seems to offset the argument about paying more for the R5 because of body strength. There might be a lot of reasons to buy the R5, but for most event and portrait photographers, body build doesn't seem to be a very big factor.
> 
> Maybe I am overestimating how well-built the R6 actually is. And, again, I'm sure that the R5 is put together a little more in mind with landscape and wildlife situations. But I sure wouldn't make my decision based solely on which camera is built better.


Polycarbonate shelled bodies are very durable! The cheaper bodies take a hell of a lot of abuse not least of which is because they have so much less mass.


----------



## Deleted member 381342 (Jul 19, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I have to chuckle when I hear people saying they want the better body build of the R5. While I'm sure that in fact it is somewhat sturdier, I would be less heartbroken dropping an R6 off a tall tripod onto rocks then an R5. The R6 would cost less to replace if the drop resulted in a totaled body. Weather Sealing is more debatable, more understandable, for those who really take their gear out in inclement conditions. But again, because weather sealing only goes so far, the idea of being able to save $1,500 on a body that might end up completely soaked or even dropped in water, seems to offset the argument about paying more for the R5 because of body strength. There might be a lot of reasons to buy the R5, but for most event and portrait photographers, body build doesn't seem to be a very big factor.
> 
> Maybe I am overestimating how well-built the R6 actually is. And, again, I'm sure that the R5 is put together a little more in mind with landscape and wildlife situations. But I sure wouldn't make my decision based solely on which camera is built better.



There is a wee bit more to it than the cost. Yes financially if you drop a £4000 camera vs a £2500 is is more of a big deal. But there is the weather sealing to take into account too. The 5 series bodies and then 1 bodies will hold up in a tropical downpour where you 'need' to get the shot. And if the R5 holds up as well as my 5DII has, it'll get dozens of chips out of it and still cheep shooting. If I am on day 4 out in the highlands after some elusive animal(probably a wild cat), I don't want a drop of my camera to be the end of it. Even if the back LCD is cracked and there is a good dent in the body, I have some higher chance I can get the shot or that if I drop it in the river the card area was sealed enough to protect the data.

It depends where you are taking your camera.


----------



## Ozarker (Jul 19, 2020)

Charbax said:


> I just want 2017-grade GH5 or 2018-grade Panasonic G9 (incl official unlimited recording) features but with a Canon or Sony autofocus technology. You can buy a second hand GH5/G9 at sub-$700 now. It's been 3 and a half years now since the Panasonic GH5 came out, is it really too much to ask for Canon and Sony to match the features on one of their 2020-grade APS-C or Full Frame camera? And to expect that Canon/Sony might match the features at less than 400% the current resale price of a GH5/G9 camera?
> 
> By matching features, I might expect those slightly exceeded, that is not just 8bit 4:2:0 H264 when doing unlimited "uncropped" 4K60, but actually able to do the unlimited 4K60 in 10bit 4:2:2 to HLG HDR format YouTube-ready in HEVC H265.


Yup. I think that is too much to ask. Comparing cameras in completely different class categories. Then comparing second hand to new. Does not make sense to me.


----------



## Charbax (Jul 19, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> It depends on if you appreciate what you are asking for really. A ff sensor returning the same video specs as a sensor one quarter the size is not a small thing, readout speeds have to be twice as fast at a minimum, heat mitigation has to be four times better, etc etc. So when you ask for something 'as good' what you are actually asking for is something at least two to four times better.



I understand APS-C and Full Frame are much more challenging than micro43. But it's been soon 4 years since the Panasonic GH5 was announced. That's nearly 3 whole Moore's law cycles, improvements in processor manufacturing/performance, improvements to sensors, I expected at least for APS-C it should have been possible by now for Sony/Canon/Fuji to match what Panasonic did early 2017. Fuji gets closer but isn't quite there yet, the X-T4 has limitations that for me make it unusable. Sony's a6600 totally lacking. Canon M50, nope. By now they should at least match "uncropped" unlimited full frame 4K60 too, without overheating.


----------



## Charbax (Jul 19, 2020)

CanonFanBoy said:


> Yup. I think that is too much to ask. Comparing cameras in completely different class categories. Then comparing second hand to new. Does not make sense to me.


I don't think it's fair to compare $1999 retail price in January 2017 of GH5 with $2499 of the R6 in August 2020, the GH5 regularly sells sub $1300 new retail, even $999 is possible. And I believe when a product is older and broadly available on the second hand market, that second hand price should be considered too when comparing the value of a product vs another.


----------



## dirtyvu (Jul 19, 2020)

jd7 said:


> I agree the R system seems to have a fantastic foundation, but the questions are how much Canon is going to charge for it, and what the competition is offering. Would be great if Sigma and Tamron start offering RF mount lenses, and if Samyang keep releasing lenses like their RF 85mm f/1.4 AF, but we will have to see what happens.
> 
> As for an EOS R being a solid upgrade for me over my 6D II, I'm far from convinced about that. Yes it would give me a newer sensor, but I'd get lesser battery life, lower FPS when tracking and, most importantly to me, have to deal with an EVF introducing latency into what I'm seeing (not to mention I spend too much time looking at screens as it is!). Plus the current asking price for an EOS R plus control ring adapter is around A$3000, which is almost 50% more than I paid for my 6D II. And as I alluded to in my earlier post, there is the price of the RF lenses too consider too. All in all, I'm not at all sure I'd be happy if I spent money on an R.



I have both the EOS R and the 6D2 and it's a world of difference. The images are much much better. The focusing is much better. The camera UI is snappier. The video on the 6D2 was terrible with horrible AF (not even DPAF). The AI servo may be slower but the hit rate was much lower on the 6D2. I felt the hit rate was around 60% on the 6D2 versus 90% on the EOS R. The 6D2 does feel faster while shooting but in the end, it's the end product that matters and the images and videos from the EOS R soundly beat the 6D2.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 19, 2020)

Charbax said:


> I don't think it's fair to compare $1999 retail price in January 2017 of GH5 with $2499 of the R6 in August 2020, the GH5 regularly sells sub $1300 new retail, even $999 is possible. And I believe when a product is older and broadly available on the second hand market, that second hand price should be considered too when comparing the value of a product vs another.


It might help if you gave examples of products that have exceeded your expectations in this regard.

Jack


----------



## Fast351 (Jul 19, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I have to chuckle when I hear people saying they want the better body build of the R5. While I'm sure that in fact it is somewhat sturdier, I would be less heartbroken dropping an R6 off a tall tripod onto rocks then an R5. The R6 would cost less to replace if the drop resulted in a totaled body. Weather Sealing is more debatable, more understandable, for those who really take their gear out in inclement conditions. But again, because weather sealing only goes so far, the idea of being able to save $1,500 on a body that might end up completely soaked or even dropped in water, seems to offset the argument about paying more for the R5 because of body strength. There might be a lot of reasons to buy the R5, but for most event and portrait photographers, body build doesn't seem to be a very big factor.
> 
> Maybe I am overestimating how well-built the R6 actually is. And, again, I'm sure that the R5 is put together a little more in mind with landscape and wildlife situations. But I sure wouldn't make my decision based solely on which camera is built better.



With you there. I'm not a pro wildlife photographer so maybe their needs are different, but my current 70D hasn't failed and I treat it like a tool not a baby. 

I get the need to have the best available and it's cool to say "hey I have a magnesium weatherproof body" but how many of us actually need that?


----------



## Fast351 (Jul 19, 2020)

dirtyvu said:


> I have both the EOS R and the 6D2 and it's a world of difference. The images are much much better. The focusing is much better. The camera UI is snappier. The video on the 6D2 was terrible with horrible AF (not even DPAF). The AI servo may be slower but the hit rate was much lower on the 6D2. I felt the hit rate was around 60% on the 6D2 versus 90% on the EOS R. The 6D2 does feel faster while shooting but in the end, it's the end product that matters and the images and videos from the EOS R soundly beat the 6D2.



The AF system is the entire reason I am switching to mirrorless. A DSLR cannot compete with DPAF, period. And I'm getting tired of shots getting ruined because of an inferior AF system.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 19, 2020)

Charbax said:


> I understand APS-C and Full Frame are much more challenging than micro43. But it's been soon 4 years since the Panasonic GH5 was announced. That's nearly 3 whole Moore's law cycles, improvements in processor manufacturing/performance, improvements to sensors, I expected at least for APS-C it should have been possible by now for Sony/Canon/Fuji to match what Panasonic did early 2017. Fuji gets closer but isn't quite there yet, the X-T4 has limitations that for me make it unusable. Sony's a6600 totally lacking. Canon M50, nope. By now they should at least match "uncropped" unlimited full frame 4K60 too, without overheating.


So buy something else I don't give a damn. My point was you are not asking for something equal, you are asking for something with two to four times the ability PLUS AF. I could just as easily say Canon has been making class leading Live View AF to the point that it has changed the game for years, why can't Panasonic given their much smaller sensors?

And how you can moan about the price of a brand new camera with a ff sensor in relation tof our year old secondhand cameras with M4/3 sensors makes you seem childish. get real, if Canon don't make a camera you need for the price you can pay buy another make, if nobody makes a camera to suit your vision then I suspect that is you not the camera.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 19, 2020)

Fast351 said:


> The AF system is the entire reason I am switching to mirrorless. A DSLR cannot compete with DPAF, period. And I'm getting tired of shots getting ruined because of an inferior AF system.


I'd wager a skilled user with a DSLR would get many more keepers than a less skilled user with MILC...


----------



## yeahright (Jul 19, 2020)

briangus said:


> Shot a music festival last year, gripped 5D4 and 200 F2 and a gripped EOSR with RF85 F1.2
> Just over 1600 shots on both but had to swap batteries out on the 5D4 after about 900 shots
> Still life in the R's batteries a few days later


Sometimes when I read numbers like this I do wonder if there's something wrong with my 5D4. I get only about 300 photos per battery (LP-E6N) with non-IS lenses (e.g. the 24-70 f/2.8L II), sometimes even fewer. That is in one shot mode, no continuous shooting; I take one photo maybe every one or two minutes, the back display is turned on for displaying settings, but the camera is set to auto power off after 1 minute, image review time is 2 seconds but - admittedly - I chimp every photo and check focus in zoom view, but only for a few seconds. What I did find out is that when using the top display instead of the back display for checking settings the number of photos per battery goes up, but I find the back display much more comfortable, in particular, it allows me to choose the focus point without having to look through the viewfinder. Sorry for the off-topic post, but since a discussion about battery life was going on anyway, I thought it wouldn't make much of a difference.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 19, 2020)

YuengLinger said:


> I have to chuckle when I hear people saying they want the better body build of the R5.


Has anyone actually said _that_?


----------



## pulseimages (Jul 19, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Video quality from pre-production EOS R5 - Stunning!!
> Vídeo quality from production EOS R6 - Stunning!!
> Still Image quality from EOS R6 - Stunning!!
> 
> What´s NOT TO LIKE from these 2 beast!!! Keep going haters!!  Can´t wait to put my hands on both!! Looking sooo forward to test 4k120fps from R5 and stills from both of the cameras!! Looking promising!



Still image quality from the R6 would of been better if Chris had actually nailed his focus. A lot of the shots of Jordan and the train especially are not sharp.


----------



## definedphotography (Jul 19, 2020)

yeahright said:


> Sometimes when I read numbers like this I do wonder if there's something wrong with my 5D4. I get only about 300 photos per battery (LP-E6N) with non-IS lenses (e.g. the 24-70 f/2.8L II), sometimes even fewer.



My 5D4 definitely gets less shots per battery than my old 7D2, but I still can get 1200-1500 shots before a battery change. No grip.
I have Wifi, GPS & any other comms option turned off, but the preview is on, RAW to both cards is on.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 19, 2020)

definedphotography said:


> My 5D4 definitely gets less shots per battery than my old 7D2, but I still can get 1200-1500 shots before a battery change. No grip.
> I have Wifi, GPS & any other comms option turned off, but the preview is on, RAW to both cards is on.


Again, what lenses are you using for 1500 shots?


----------



## pulseimages (Jul 19, 2020)

Seeing as this is Canon's first foray into IBIS and 8K wouldn't it be wise to follow the old saying of "Don't buy first generation of anything"? Wait till the second generation when they've had time to work out the bugs.


----------



## pulseimages (Jul 19, 2020)

What I would like to know is will the EF lenses required to take advantage of the R5's sensor be the same list Canon released when the 5DS/R hit the market?


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 20, 2020)

pulseimages said:


> What I would like to know is will the EF lenses required to take advantage of the R5's sensor be the same list Canon released when the 5DS/R hit the market?


Getting into the same resolution realm, so I'd guess yes. I've followed AlanF's comments on the 5DSR and generally they were very positive without complaints about glass.

Jack


----------



## cornieleous (Jul 20, 2020)

degos said:


> It's neither arrogance or immaturity, it's frustration.
> 
> They're not obligated to build the perfect camera but if they want to continue to sell cameras in a shrinking market with sharper competition then they need to address the specific requirements of discerning users.
> 
> ...



The pre-order success shows that Canon understands the market very well. However, by your argument, delivered as if it is fact ("that's the market.") Canon should be struggling right now for failing to impress "discerning" customers. What is discerning about complaining about a company not building a product to your exact desires? What specific things are missing from these cameras that displeases you, yet you are doing fine with your 1DX and 1DS3? Maybe something is lost in text communication here, but to be frank it sounds a lot like complaining just to complain to me. There seems to be a growing amount of this lately- people pointing out everything wrong, every way they are being victimized or denied some opportunity and what they should be getting- that behavior is what people are labeling entitlement, and I agree with them. Placing opinions and emotions over the compromise required of reality is a form of entitlement. I'm always all ears for a rational critique or well presented frustration, but that comes with some logical reasoning, not just emotion and opinion.

Your words (Canon have failed to produce anything compelling....they better damn well earn it...) suggests you take this somewhat personally but I can't relate to those vague complaints or the emotion. To me and many others Canon have been making great cameras and lenses at many price points all along. I still shoot with a 100-400 mm Mk1, and I'm certainly not mad at Canon that the updates to the lens don't justify the price of a new one to me. Why bother if I am happy where I am at?

How is it you are working fine with older cameras instead of switching brands if the grass is so much greener with all the competition? You imply Canon is failing to compete, so it begs the question.... Or has no company impressed you and you are just upset in general, waiting for some perfect camera for a custom price? Life is short, love what you have or move along if you've found something better. Why be unhappy? You could contact Canon or these other companies directly, which is sure to be more effective in making them consider changing to your needs.


----------



## Edward Winter (Jul 20, 2020)

BakaBokeh said:


> That R5 footage is amazing. Kept yelling, "Look at that dynamic range!" as I was pointing at my screen.
> 
> View attachment 191392



Any specs on stops of dynamic range yet? Can't seem to find that anywhere.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 20, 2020)

Edward Winter said:


> Any specs on stops of dynamic range yet? Can't seem to find that anywhere.


No but it’s going to be VERY similar to the 1DX III


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

Edward Winter said:


> Any specs on stops of dynamic range yet? Can't seem to find that anywhere.



DPReview said Canon told them to expect a 1-stop increase in DR against the R. This was repeated in the launch broadcast from B&H.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> DPReview said Canon told them to expect a 1-stop increase in DR against the R. This was repeated in the launch broadcast from B&H.


The 1DX III is 2/3 stop better than the R in unprocessed RAW data.


----------



## Skux (Jul 20, 2020)

Seems like an ideal camera for a lot of people. The only reasons you'd want to pay the premium for the R5 is for 8k, 4k120p, or for more megapixels.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Jul 20, 2020)

pulseimages said:


> Seeing as this is Canon's first foray into IBIS and 8K wouldn't it be wise to follow the old saying of "Don't buy first generation of anything"? Wait till the second generation when they've had time to work out the bugs.



We'll be waiting forever.

DSLR - Let's wait for mirrorless....
R - kinda basic and compared to the completion. Let' wait.
RP - let's REEEEALY WAIT!
R5/R6 - Wow! but let's wait...

If anything, wait a month after not just full reviews are out, but actually customers got to use it.


----------



## yeahright (Jul 20, 2020)

definedphotography said:


> My 5D4 definitely gets less shots per battery than my old 7D2, but I still can get 1200-1500 shots before a battery change. No grip.
> I have Wifi, GPS & any other comms option turned off, but the preview is on, RAW to both cards is on.


in a comparable shooting style?


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 20, 2020)

AlanF said:


> Again, what lenses are you using for 1500 shots?


around 1500 frames with 24-70/2.8 IIL, 1200-1300 with 70-200/2.8 II L. Give or take


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The 1DX III is 2/3 stop better than the R in unprocessed RAW data.



We don't know what metrics Canon used when they calculated that 1-stop improvement, they may or may not be giving the same results as PTP's methods. Also we don't know if the R5 sensor has the same DR performance as the R6/1DXIII.
But even +2/3 stops of DR will be great.


----------



## yeahright (Jul 20, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> around 1500 frames with 24-70/2.8 IIL, 1200-1300 with 70-200/2.8 II L. Give or take


with or without continuous shooting?


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 20, 2020)

yeahright said:


> with or without continuous shooting?


Single shot focus and recompose. In continues shooting mode, Zone AF, no more than 2-3 shots at a time over 1-2 hours period, number of frames goes up somewhat. Ummm.. Av or Tv mode. No chimping...


----------



## yeahright (Jul 20, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Single shot focus and recompose. In continues shooting mode, Zone AF, no more than 2-3 shots at a time over 1-2 hours period, number of frames goes up somewhat. Ummm.. Av or Tv mode. No chimping...


 wow. Over what time period in single shot? Back display on or off for displaying settings? Could the chimping really make so much difference? Considering having my 5D4 checked, too bad it's out of warranty already. I carry 6 charged batteries around with me, seems that is many more than other people use.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2020)

yeahright said:


> wow. Over what time period in single shot? Back display on or off for displaying settings? Could the chimping really make so much difference? Considering having my 5D4 checked, too bad it's out of warranty already. I carry 6 charged batteries around with me, seems that is many more than other people use.


I once sent back a battery burner within warranty period. It of course came back as “within specs”.


----------



## jd7 (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> DPReview said Canon told them to expect a 1-stop increase in DR against the R. This was repeated in the launch broadcast from B&H.


Photons to Photons says the 1Dx III has between a half and one stop more DR than the EOS R at base ISO. It seems the R6 uses essentially the same sensor as the 1Dx III, and it seems reasonably likely to me the R5 and R6 use the same generation of sensor technology (given they have been released at the same time, and the cameras share things like a common max FPS, albeit at much lower resolution for the R6). I reckon that all points to the R5, R6 and 1Dx III having similar DR, and "about 1 stop" better than the EOS R at base ISO being about right.

Photons to Photons


Photographic Dynamic Range versus ISO Setting


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 20, 2020)

degos said:


> It's neither arrogance or immaturity, it's frustration.
> 
> They're not obligated to build the perfect camera but if they want to continue to sell cameras in a shrinking market with sharper competition then they need to address the specific requirements of discerning users.
> 
> ...


So, do you get mad at the hammer when you miss the nail and hit your thumb? Seriously, these are tools with strengths, weaknesses, and limitations. Some of us feel Canon has delivered a "compelling" reason to buy their new gear. We may be right, we may be wrong, but you clearly do not have an understanding or appreciation of what they have delivered. The R5/R6 should clearly match and in some cases exceed the capabilities of the Nikon & Sony offering. Every part, software feature and capability cost money to design, develop, manufacture, market and support whether or not is required by all users. If yo duo not believe it is compelling, then you are basically saying nothing in the current (and next) generation is worth you money. If that is the case, enjoy your current gear or get a new hobby/profession. I know a little bit about technology, sensor production - all of the current offerings are pushing up against limits in both physics, material science and technology that will require significant R&D to provide a truly significant breakthrough. If you can't capture meaningful images with your current gear and the new offerings, maybe the problem is not the gear. 

The good news is that that we each get to vote with our dollars.


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

jd7 said:


> Photons to Photons says the 1Dx III has between a half and one stop more DR than the EOS R at base ISO.



0.65 stops exactly at ISO 100



jd7 said:


> I reckon that all points to the R5 and R6 having similar DR to the 1Dx III, and "about 1 stop" better than the EOS R at base ISO being about right.



Yes it's likely to happen, but there's a number of unknowns:

- Canon told us there would be 1-stop improvement against R/5DIV which will be a bit more than 1DXIII
- R5 is 45mp, R6 is 20mp, probably the sensor is based on the similar tech but still it's a different sensor, likely developed after the 1DXIII one.
- We don't know if Canon uses the same or similar method of measuring the DR as PTP does.

So I'm very curious to see what PTP shows on R5.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 20, 2020)

Quarkcharmed said:


> [..]Yes it's likely to happen, but there's a number of unknowns:
> 
> - Canon told us there would be 1-stop improvement against R/5DIV which will be a bit more than 1DXIII
> [..]



I've watched way too many interviews with Rudy about the new cameras by now, but he is *very* consistent in saying that it's an '_effective_ 1 stop' improvement. That, to me, leaves a lot of room for interpretation. I think it's the 0.65 stop you mentioned, plus another 0.35 or so JPEG/HEIF noise reduction improvements in the Digic X.
I'd love to be proven wrong


----------



## Quarkcharmed (Jul 20, 2020)

koenkooi said:


> I've watched way too many interviews with Rudy about the new cameras by now, but he is *very* consistent in saying that it's an '_effective_ 1 stop' improvement. That, to me, leaves a lot of room for interpretation. I think it's the 0.65 stop you mentioned, plus another 0.35 or so JPEG/HEIF noise reduction improvements in the Digic X.
> I'd love to be proven wrong



All these measurements are done on raw files and before noise reduction.
So my best guess is, the R5 will be a bit better than the R6/1DXIII, but I may be wrong because of caveats in my message above.


----------



## padam (Jul 20, 2020)

Skux said:


> Seems like an ideal camera for a lot of people. The only reasons you'd want to pay the premium for the R5 is for 8k, 4k120p, or for more megapixels.


Apart from the cost savings on the top LCD, EVF and rear screen, the Canon Log 3 with the extra dynamic range will be very welcome for video shooters for the R5, no such things promised for the R6.
The R6 is more aimed at users who aren't looking more seriously at the Cinema line, and just want a good camera for photo and video, and it will probably succeed at that.


----------



## Sharlin (Jul 20, 2020)

padam said:


> Apart from the cost savings on the top LCD, EVF and rear screen, the Canon Log 3 with the extra dynamic range will be very welcome for video shooters for the R5, no such things promised for the R6.



Pretty crazy that the R6 has C-Log at all. Remember when just a couple years ago the best you could get below the 1D level was a paid upgrade to the 5D4!


----------



## padam (Jul 20, 2020)

Sharlin said:


> Pretty crazy that the R6 has C-Log at all. Remember when just a couple years ago the best you could get below the 1D level was a paid upgrade to the 5D4!


The EOS R is much cheaper now, and it has that as well.


----------



## This_That (Jul 20, 2020)

Canon should knock 1000 Euro off the price and lock Video to 1080p with Firmware. I'd buy that.


----------



## padam (Jul 20, 2020)




----------



## Mike9129 (Jul 20, 2020)

A few pages back people were comparing mirrorless to DSLR. I owned both the 6dmkii and the eos r.

The EoS R is streets ahead in everything barr battery life and that 6dmkii had a built in GPS. Image quality and autofocus are in a different league. 

If the r5 is as much an upgrade over the 5div/eos r as the eos r was over the 6dmkii, itll be the camera to beat. Even tho it's not the king in terms of absolute mp (hat tip to Sony there), it brings a lot of features together in a way I dont think has been done before by any brand, and certainly not by canon. 

I mean, 45mp stills at 20fps with full frame AF tracking??? Why is no one making a bigger deal out of this?

Everyone is just stuck on the 8k recording limit. Newsflash - you dont want to handle that much data. When 5mins recording will give you 150gb+ of footage you'll learn to spare the record button fairly fast.


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 20, 2020)

yeahright said:


> wow. Over what time period in single shot? Back display on or off for displaying settings? Could the chimping really make so much difference? Considering having my 5D4 checked, too bad it's out of warranty already. I carry 6 charged batteries around with me, seems that is many more than other people use.


over 1-4 hours. depending on the gig. back display settings: off, display image: 3 sec ( default settings..)

I put around 150K shots through pair of my 5D4s in last 2.5 years. always have a pair of spare batteries on me - just in case. I rarely need a change. I typically. swap batteries between bodies as 24-70 lens gets more use at events and 70-20 gets more use at festivals, etc. walking away with 2000-2500 shots on a pair of charged batteries is just normal.. BT, Wifi, GPS is off. no liveView. writing to both cards


----------



## Chris.Chapterten (Jul 20, 2020)

Fast351 said:


> The AF system is the entire reason I am switching to mirrorless. A DSLR cannot compete with DPAF, period. And I'm getting tired of shots getting ruined because of an inferior AF system.


I agree. Having the AF directly on the sensor improves things significantly. My 5DIV was never as accurate as my EOS R is now... and that's after it was cleaned and calibrated by Canon service a couple of times..


----------



## LesC (Jul 20, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> A few pages back people were comparing mirrorless to DSLR. I owned both the 6dmkii and the eos r.
> 
> The EoS R is streets ahead in everything barr battery life and that 6dmkii had a built in GPS. Image quality and autofocus are in a different league.
> 
> ...


I'd agree with all of this having both the 6D MKII & the R which I hope to replace with the R5. Video doesn't really bother me; only ever use it for the odd clip on holiday for which i can use my phone anyway. 

If the R6 had been 30 MP I'd go for that but I wonder if Canon have purposely made it 20 MP so that it doesn't take potential sales from the R5?


----------



## Go Wild (Jul 20, 2020)

pulseimages said:


> Still image quality from the R6 would of been better if Chris had actually nailed his focus. A lot of the shots of Jordan and the train especially are not sharp.


Yeah, but that´s user error, not a camera fault!  They did show some pics that are perfect in sharpness and color. Of course it´s quite difficult to evaluate picture quality from pics in a video on youtube, but we do have an idea how great still image can be from the EOS R6. And it looks quite promising!


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 20, 2020)

LesC said:


> I'd agree with all of this having both the 6D MKII & the R which I hope to replace with the R5. Video doesn't really bother me; only ever use it for the odd clip on holiday for which i can use my phone anyway.[..]



For most of the things I take videos of (my kids), the phone currently does a better job  The M6II is a huge improvement, but the lack of stabilization in the decent EF-M lenses still gives the phone an edge.


----------



## koenkooi (Jul 20, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Yeah, but that´s user error, not a camera fault!  They did show some pics that are perfect in sharpness and color. Of course it´s quite difficult to evaluate picture quality from pics in a video on youtube, but we do have an idea how great still image can be from the EOS R6. And it looks quite promising!



DPReview has a sample gallery of the video, with RAWs.


----------



## stochasticmotions (Jul 20, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> A few pages back people were comparing mirrorless to DSLR. I owned both the 6dmkii and the eos r.
> 
> The EoS R is streets ahead in everything barr battery life and that 6dmkii had a built in GPS. Image quality and autofocus are in a different league.
> 
> ...


I think there will be a lot of stills (nature and sport) photographers that will be very interested in the 45mp at 20fps. I'm impressed with the 12 fps with the mechanical shutter as I already know that will likely not have any issues and is a significant increase from any 5 series body in the past. That is enough for me to buy this camera considering the buffer seems to be pretty reasonable as well. The 20 fps will be an extra bonus depending on the speed at which the data can be taken from the sensor. I'm not expecting this camera to match the Sony A9 since I don't think this is the same type of sensor, but if it can capture birds in flight without warping wings too much this could be very cool. 

I think many of us are waiting for some reviews from independent reviewers (note the plural) before either getting too excited or bashing the camera. With this camera supposed to be shipping in less that 2 weeks, I'm surprised that there aren't any reviews as everyone still seems to have beta firmware. That tells me there are things Canon is still updating and likely means we will have a firmware update almost as soon as the camera gets into peoples hands.


----------



## Jack Douglas (Jul 20, 2020)

SwissFrank said:


> the most compelling reason for 8k now this year 2020 that I've heard.


This is only true if the AF is up to focusing in the time allotted. 1/20 is 50 ms and that happens to be Canon's quoted maximum speed of focus but with what lens? I'll be shocked and very pleased if I can get sharp photos in a scenario with 20 fps and 400 DO II X2 III. The 1DX2 has never consistently been able to do that at 4K30 and certainly not at 4K60. I will never come on CR complaining about what I consider to be very challenging expectations but I'll surely be singing praises if it's that good.

Now if the situation is not so challenging then a couple seconds of 8K30 could generate some very nice photos, no doubt. Even if 1/10 were in focus that would be very valuable. And 10 seconds of a beautiful scene could generate some amazing video with panning and zooming and still super resolution. But what do we hear - complaints that you can't shoot an hour of it. All the whining and grizzling about the R5 tells far more about the personalities than the camera. 

Jack


----------



## AlanF (Jul 20, 2020)

Chris.Chapterten said:


> I agree. Having the AF directly on the sensor improves things significantly. My 5DIV was never as accurate as my EOS R is now... and that's after it was cleaned and calibrated by Canon service a couple of times..


I calibrate my 5DIV myself and have no complaints about its accuracy or reproducibility of focus. It's as good focussing through its OVF as using liveview, if not slightly more reliable.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Jul 20, 2020)

Studio scene is up at DPReview 








Canon EOS R6 added to studio test scene


We've put our full-production Canon EOS R6 in front of our studio scene to see what's what – check it out for yourself.




www.dpreview.com


----------



## SteveC (Jul 20, 2020)

This_That said:


> Canon should knock 1000 Euro off the price and lock Video to 1080p with Firmware. I'd buy that.



They'd get no benefit whatsoever from doing so. It saves them no money producing the camera and therefore, conceivably, they could lose money selling a camera for that price.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 20, 2020)

Mike9129 said:


> A few pages back people were comparing mirrorless to DSLR. I owned both the 6dmkii and the eos r.
> 
> The EoS R is streets ahead in everything barr battery life and that 6dmkii had a built in GPS. Image quality and autofocus are in a different league.
> 
> ...



Hold on now, you must not have got the memo in re: Rational thought is forbidden here.


----------



## Fast351 (Jul 20, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> I'd wager a skilled user with a DSLR would get many more keepers than a less skilled user with MILC...



I agree wholeheartedly. That said, at least MY camera, the 70D, the autofocus system through the OVF for moving wildlife is sub-par. Anything that's "easier" for the camera to nail focus is a gimme, but for example I was shooting some loons yesterday. My keeper ratio was under 50%, and these are shots where the loon wasn't moving much, and my focus technique was the same for all shots. The camera just plain missed focus. It didn't miss by much, mind you, but enough to make the image soft. I am using the 100-400 II lens, and I have run the exact same lens on a mirrorless body during the same shoot, and the keeper ratio was easily double the 70D. 

You may say that my skill is less than others which is undoubtedly true, but I have a hard time believing the equipment is not partially at fault. Otherwise how would two identically composed pictures shot the same way come out with different focus results?


----------



## davidhfe (Jul 20, 2020)

LesC said:


> I'd agree with all of this having both the 6D MKII & the R which I hope to replace with the R5. Video doesn't really bother me; only ever use it for the odd clip on holiday for which i can use my phone anyway.
> 
> If the R6 had been 30 MP I'd go for that but I wonder if Canon have purposely made it 20 MP so that it doesn't take potential sales from the R5?



I think it's the reality of a shrinking camera market. Canon simply might not be able to afford to develop 3 new sensors at the same time. I'd guess that Canon is actively working on both a high res sensor for the "R5s" as well as a long-term solution for a higher mp "mid-range" sensor that's a better fit between 20 and 45.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Jul 21, 2020)

Pretty sure all of these are SPAM, looks like stock footage being passed off as R5/R6


----------



## telemaque (Jul 21, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Pretty sure all of these are SPAM, looks like stock footage being passed off as R5/R6



Why do think this is the case?


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Jul 21, 2020)

telemaque said:


> Why do think this is the case?


Cause they are adding this it everyone of their posts for days...

_canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization _


----------



## telemaque (Jul 21, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Cause they are adding this it everyone of their posts for days...
> 
> _canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization _





Ramage said:


> Cause they are adding this it everyone of their posts for days...
> 
> _canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs r6 specs canon eos r5 vs sony a7riv canon eos r5 vs 5d mark iv canon eos r5 vs 1dx mark iii canon eos r5 review canon eos r5 price canon eos r5 official video canon eos r5 unboxing canon eos r5 camera canon eos r5 release date canon eos r5 footage canon eos r5 official canon eos r5 hands on canon eos r5 specs canon eos r5 peter mckinnon eos r5 eos r6 vs r5 canon eos r5 vs r6 canon eos r5 vs eos r5 stabilization _


THANKS.

I WILL DELETE THAN.


----------



## exige24 (Jul 21, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Why would be a joke of a lens? It's a very good lens and lightweight. For most of the situations 1.8 is more than enough aperture and weight saving can be very valuable when traveling light(er). Nikon will have a brighter version too just like they will have an 50 1.2 soon.
> 
> Canon also made a joke lens recently, the 85 F2.


If i were DIRECTLY comparing the two, yes it a joke. Just like that Nikkon lens.


----------



## exige24 (Jul 21, 2020)

padam said:


> I think plenty of people, that was a core reason to switch to mirrorless in the first place.
> Some might not be happy about a 28-70mm f/2 or 50mm f/1.2 being significantly bigger and heavier than the 24-70mm f/2.8 50mm f/1.2 lenses that they've used before (but they are superior, as they should be)
> The RF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS lens is unique in the RF world, because it is also significantly lighter and smaller while being even sharper, and some people are willing to pay for that privilege (even if it comes as an external zoom with a longer throw).
> There will be more small lenses of course, but for people specifically looking for that, the RF system might not be the best right now.
> ...



Who cares about stupidity? Their no size desire was as inane then just like it is now. Your light weight RF 70-200 cant even use the extenders that were just release. You'd sacrifice photographic function because your wrists are weak? lol The entire idea behind the compact form function. Please deny that. Shameful.


----------



## telemaque (Jul 21, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Cause they are adding this it everyone of their posts for days...



Dear Ramage,

FYI, I have signaled all these videos to YOUTUBE yesterday night and discovered this morning they had been deleted...
*Youtube did the job !*

Thanks for your remark and together we can continue to have our Canon community not polluted by such people.

Great thanks and good day to you.


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Jul 21, 2020)

exige24 said:


> Who cares about stupidity? Their no size desire was as inane then just like it is now. Your light weight RF 70-200 cant even use the extenders that were just release. You'd sacrifice photographic function because your wrists are weak? lol The entire idea behind the compact form function. Please deny that. Shameful.



Canon is likely a lot smarter and know their market better than you. And likely 99% of photographers prefer the much smaller size and weight of the 70-200 than the ability to add TC.


----------



## noncho (Jul 21, 2020)

This_That said:


> Canon should knock 1000 Euro off the price and lock Video to 1080p with Firmware. I'd buy that.


There you go - Nikon Z5


----------



## Juangrande (Jul 21, 2020)

Totally irrelevant to this thread but wasn’t there supposed to be a new flagship speedlight coming out with the new bodies??


----------



## exige24 (Jul 22, 2020)

blackcoffee17 said:


> Canon is likely a lot smarter and know their market better than you. And likely 99% of photographers prefer the much smaller size and weight of the 70-200 than the ability to add TC.



I was all ready to sell my EF 70-200 II to pick it up along with my R5 until I found out about that. I don't want it now. My freaking 10 year old lens has more photographic function that the state of the art just released because why? People wanting to be Zoolander. Absolutely shameful.


----------



## puffo25 (Jul 22, 2020)

Hi all, I am still struggling between which camera body to buy: R5 and R6. I do NOT care much about video nor about making large poster size prints... My main focus is to make landscape, fine art b&w, street photos, events, astro, milky way and panoramic images.
Friend of mine who is in the astro/night star trails and panoramic images strongly suggest me to buy the R6 since the R5 sensor is too big and larger files are either not necessary for that kind of pictures. He also think that the 20 megapixel sensor is much better than the 45 megapixels sensor for my various photo genre.
I am wondering if you also think that overall speaking, the R6 will be a better choice?
And in low light conditions do you think it will create cleaner and better files/ie less noise, than the R5?

Any feedback is much appreciated.
Andrea


----------



## puffo25 (Jul 22, 2020)

Atlasman said:


> In my view, the R5 is the ultimate hybrid camera to this point in time—which includes the to-be-released Sony A7SIII. The R5 has compelling video formats (4K DCI 120fps 10-bit) a 45mp sensor, outstanding IBIS, great ergonomics and class leading AF. The R6 is NOT an R5!



*Atlasman, Hi, you mean the R5 has a better AF than the R6? I thought they were the same... And about IBIS is the R5 any better than the R6?*


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Jul 22, 2020)

puffo25 said:


> Hi all, I am still struggling between which camera body to buy: R5 and R6. I do NOT care much about video nor about making large poster size prints... My main focus is to make landscape, fine art b&w, street photos, events, astro, milky way and panoramic images.
> Friend of mine who is in the astro/night star trails and panoramic images strongly suggest me to buy the R6 since the R5 sensor is too big and larger files are either not necessary for that kind of pictures. He also think that the 20 megapixel sensor is much better than the 45 megapixels sensor for my various photo genre.
> I am wondering if you also think that overall speaking, the R6 will be a better choice?
> And in low light conditions do you think it will create cleaner and better files/ie less noise, than the R5?
> ...



Sounds like you are getting solid advice from your friend. If you trust them look no further. 

The R5 vs R6 debate is simple in terms of photography. Do you want/need 45mp images? If yes the R5 wins if no save some money and get the R6 and more glass.


----------



## puffo25 (Jul 23, 2020)

Ramage said:


> Sounds like you are getting solid advice from your friend. If you trust them look no further.
> 
> The R5 vs R6 debate is simple in terms of photography. Do you want/need 45mp images? If yes the R5 wins if no save some money and get the R6 and more glass.



Thanks Ramage for your kind reply. I do not think it is only about the megapixels sensor difference. The R5 has better weather proof sealing, 5Ghz wifi and few other things....
However and again, thinking about the photo genre I have described before, ie star trails, milky way, night-astro photos, panoramic images, I am wondering if indeed the smaller sensor of the R6 is much more appropriate for that kind of images? That is my only and major question I have.
TIA.
Andrea


----------



## Atlasman (Jul 24, 2020)

puffo25 said:


> *Atlasman, Hi, you mean the R5 has a better AF than the R6? I thought they were the same... And about IBIS is the R5 any better than the R6?*


Compared to the Sony A7S3.


----------



## Kiton (Jul 24, 2020)

For those that are concerned about banding in LED lighting with the R5, I have just shot a few test frames with a Canon rep’s camera. A quick pic with full LED lighting to test. Zero Banding!

This is a rough quick test but very impressive. Shot frames at 1000 and 3200 at f 4.

if the mods want a RAW file I can send one along later today.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 24, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> The R5 will get used for landscape and wildlife when he light is good, the R6 will be the go to camera when the light fades.


What makes you think you will see any difference in low light images from the two cameras when the images are normalized?


----------



## SecureGSM (Jul 24, 2020)

Kiton said:


> For those that are concerned about banding in LED lighting with the R5, I have just shot a few test frames with a Canon rep’s camera. A quick pic with full LED lighting to test. Zero Banding!
> 
> This is a rough quick test but very impressive. Shot frames at 1000 and 3200 at f 4.
> 
> if the mods want a RAW file I can send one along later today.


Mechanical shutter or electronic shutter?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 24, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> What makes you think you will see any difference in low light images from the two cameras when the images are normalized?


It's like Groundhog Day, isn't it?


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 24, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> It's like Groundhog Day, isn't it?


Indeed! Meanwhile people continue to think they need a second camera for low light, or that they are making a choice between MP and low light performance, even when nobody can show a single pair of images illustrating that idea, why is this so hard a lesson to learn?


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 24, 2020)

It's beyond me. But then again, plenty of people think the Moon landings were faked, and that the Earth is flat, so...


----------



## SteveC (Jul 24, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Indeed! Meanwhile people continue to think they need a second camera for low light, or that they are making a choice between MP and low light performance, even when nobody can show a single pair of images illustrating that idea, why is this so hard a lesson to learn?



Perhaps many of them are looking at individual pixels, rather than the entire image.

In some contexts that might be appropriate, but when talking about taking a landscape picture one isn't planning to crop down...it's not.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 24, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> It's beyond me. But then again, plenty of people think the Moon landings were faked, and that the Earth is flat, so...



As a veteran of a long discussion with someone who pointed to some NASA report on an aerodynamics model that assumed a flat earth (to make the math simpler while only introducing errors in something like the ninth decimal place) as proof that the earth really is flat and NASA knows it...I feel the pain.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 24, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Perhaps many of them are looking at individual pixels, rather than the entire image.


It's _exactly_ that, Steve - this was being argued ten and more years ago, but images have to be viewed at the same, normalised image level in order to properly compare noise levels between cameras and sensors.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 24, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Perhaps many of them are looking at individual pixels, rather than the entire image.
> 
> In some contexts that might be appropriate, but when talking about taking a landscape picture one isn't planning to crop down...it's not.


To the idea of looking at individual pixels, that is a fallacious endeavor for two reasons, first you are no longer comparing like for like merely enlarging the higher resolution sensor noise more, so you aren’t seeing an actual comparison. Second, the argument is always ‘I need the lower resolution sensor for better high iso/low light performance‘, ergo the lower resolution is ’enough’ anyway.

If one were to frame the argument like this, I need the per pixel performance of the low resolution sensor in a high resolution sensor that makes sense, but it won’t find you a camera because that camera can’t exist by definition. If they could make such a camera the per pixel performance of a lower resolution sensor would be better still!. People have to understand what they are looking at and for when looking at high iso/low light image quality is sensor area performance, that is why all phone cameras without exception are garbage in low light. It’s why m4/3 is better than phones, APS-C is better than m4/3 and 135 format is better again, they all have comparable technology so the per area performance is similar when you look at unmolested RAW sensor output. Though the trend is to not allow you unmolested RAW files, which I find a bigger concern.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 24, 2020)

Keith_Reeder said:


> It's _exactly_ that, Steve - this was being argued ten and more years ago, but images have to be viewed at the same, normalised image level in order to properly compare noise levels between cameras and sensors.


Agreed, and to those that say ‘but I need the pixels of the higher my camera‘ then all you need to do is upsize the smaller one. The size you compare them at is irrelevant, the fact that they must be the same size is the crucial part.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 24, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Though the trend is to not allow you unmolested RAW files, which I find a bigger concern.



Sounds to my like someone is unhappy with the 24-240?? [That one rubs me the wrong way, too, though I can see a marketing rationale for it.]


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 24, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Sounds to my like someone is unhappy with the 24-240?? [That one rubs me the wrong way, too, though I can see a marketing rationale for it.]


No I wasn’t thinking of that lens, it is a lens I would never buy or use, but it is an unfortunate trend other manufacturers have pushed Canon into following and I think we, as photographers, will come to rue in the end.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 24, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> No I wasn’t thinking of that lens, it is a lens I would never buy or use, but it is an unfortunate trend other manufacturers have pushed Canon into following and I think we, as photographers, will come to rue in the end.



Well, as long as we _can_ get lenses that don't need ridiculous amounts of in-camera correction, it's not as bad as it could be.

I'd be very, very worried if lenses like this started getting the L designation.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 24, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Well, as long as we _can_ get lenses that don't need ridiculous amounts of in-camera correction, it's not as bad as it could be.
> 
> I'd be very, very worried if lenses like this started getting the L designation.


The problem I see is that it isn’t just lenses, when unknowledgeable people are expectant and hyper critical of sub 1 stop differences in noise and dynamic range and are constantly bombarded with reviewers, influencers and self appointed experts who constantly repeat misleading garbage if any manufacturer doctors/pre processes their RAW files it forces the others to do it as well so they can compete. The Sony stareater RAW files are the classic example.


----------



## Kiton (Jul 24, 2020)

SecureGSM said:


> Mechanical shutter or electronic shutter?




Electronic shutter, at full 20 fps,

not a single frame show banding. I did not have the camera for long, there was a line of people there, they wanted to shoot outside, and all I cared about was if the camera banded in LED on electronic shutter. I had a LED source, shot some tests and bolted.


----------



## SteveC (Jul 24, 2020)

OK, so to check that I understand this:

Imagine two cameras, one a 32MP APS-C (e.g., the M6-II or 90D), and the other a 32MP full frame (not sure there is such a beast), the sensors are the same "generation" and so on. Stick a 500mm lens on the crop camera, site yourself somewhere, and take a picture. Then grab the full frame, put an 800mm lens on it, and take a picture. Assume both are at the same f/ ratio. They should look identical in composition and perspective.

I would expect, _in this case_ for the crop picture to look a bit noisier, right? Both pictures have the same number of pixels, but in the FF case they're "bigger" pixels.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 24, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> What makes you think you will see any difference in low light images from the two cameras when the images are normalized?


Should be slightly better with larger pixels, don’t have to down res the image, and saves $1,400 as a backup. That said, I am considering going with 2 R5’s so I don’t have to deal with the differences AND the down res images on The Digital Picture only show R6 has a slight advantage


----------



## puffo25 (Jul 25, 2020)

Atlasman said:


> Compared to the Sony A7S3.



Compared to the Sony A7S3, what? Can you kindly provide me a full sentence.?
TIA.
Andrea


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 25, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> Should be slightly better with larger pixels, don’t have to down res the image, and saves $1,400 as a backup. That said, I am considering going with 2 R5’s so I don’t have to deal with the differences AND the down res images on The Digital Picture only show R6 has a slight advantage


Considering nobody yet has a decent way of processing R5 RAW files I’d say any analysis is premature, but I’d be surprised if there is any practical difference because “Should be slightly better with larger pixels” simply isn’t true.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 25, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> Considering nobody yet has a decent way of processing R5 RAW files I’d say any analysis is premature, but I’d be surprised if there is any practical difference because “Should be slightly better with larger pixels” simply isn’t true.



Take a look at The Digital Picture which has noise test photos up for both cameras. To me, the R6 looks slightly cleaner than the down res R5 images at ISO 3200, 6400 & 12,800 suing both DPP & PS. Is it huge, no. Yes I shoot @ ISO that high (wildlife) and yes it could be because of early versions of software. I would trust Bryan's DPP examples more than I would the PS samples at this point. Certainly more opportunity for improvement if the DPP version isn't production.


----------



## Kit. (Jul 25, 2020)

SteveC said:


> OK, so to check that I understand this:
> 
> Imagine two cameras, one a 32MP APS-C (e.g., the M6-II or 90D), and the other a 32MP full frame (not sure there is such a beast), the sensors are the same "generation" and so on. Stick a 500mm lens on the crop camera, site yourself somewhere, and take a picture. Then grab the full frame, put an 800mm lens on it, and take a picture. Assume both are at the same f/ ratio. They should look identical in composition and perspective.


They wouldn't. They have different entrance pupil sizes, so they will render the infinity differently.



SteveC said:


> I would expect, _in this case_ for the crop picture to look a bit noisier, right? Both pictures have the same number of pixels, but in the FF case they're "bigger" pixels.


It will be noisier because it has the same angle of view, but smaller entrance pupil, so it gathers less amount of photons through its entrance pupil. It does not really matter on sensor of what size these photons are projected.

If, instead of the same f/ ratio, you specify the same entrance pupil size, you will get exactly the same picture and exactly the same noise, as long as your smaller sensor can cope with the increased exposure (and decreased ISO to match it without losing photons in ND filters).

A smaller sensor needs a higher light flux density to receive the same light flux, but _as long as_ the lens can project it and the sensor is not overflown by it (both _limitations_ benefit the larger sensor area), the smaller sensor will render the same image with the same noise.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 25, 2020)

Danglin52 said:


> Take a look at The Digital Picture which has noise test photos up for both cameras. To me, the R6 looks slightly cleaner than the down res R5 images at ISO 3200, 6400 & 12,800 suing both DPP & PS. Is it huge, no. Yes I shoot @ ISO that high (wildlife) and yes it could be because of early versions of software. I would trust Bryan's DPP examples more than I would the PS samples at this point. Certainly more opportunity for improvement if the DPP version isn't production.


The DPR comparison tool is showing virtually no difference in the files, even when you copy them and put them into 'difference' mode in Photoshop there is virtually no difference, they could be images from the same camera. The noise characteristics and distribution is identical.

Here is the R5 and R6 at 6,400iso with the R5 image overlaid on the R6 image in 'difference' mode, (darker is better). There is virtually no difference.


----------



## Keith_Reeder (Jul 25, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> but I’d be surprised if there is any practical difference because “Should be slightly better with larger pixels” simply isn’t true.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 25, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The DPR comparison tool is showing virtually no difference in the files, even when you copy them and put them into 'difference' mode in Photoshop there is virtually no difference, they could be images from the same camera. The noise characteristics and distribution is identical.
> 
> Here is the R5 and R6 at 6,400iso with the R5 image overlaid on the R6 image in 'difference' mode, (darker is better). There is virtually no difference.
> 
> View attachment 191546


You might as well be arguing with a member of the Flat Earth Society about the shape of the Earth.


----------



## Danglin52 (Jul 25, 2020)

privatebydesign said:


> The DPR comparison tool is showing virtually no difference in the files, even when you copy them and put them into 'difference' mode in Photoshop there is virtually no difference, they could be images from the same camera. The noise characteristics and distribution is identical.
> 
> Here is the R5 and R6 at 6,400iso with the R5 image overlaid on the R6 image in 'difference' mode, (darker is better). There is virtually no difference.
> 
> View attachment 191546


What are you comparing? RAW or JPG? As of 5 minutes ago, I downloaded the latest updates to PS and you still can't open the R6/R5 files from DPR. From above, it looks like you are using a converted PNG from somewhere. 

I actually like the full shot color charts that The Digital Pictures uses for Noise vs the DPR tool - too much clutter on DPR. 

David.


----------



## padam (Jul 27, 2020)

new review:


----------



## stevelee (Jul 28, 2020)

degos said:


> They're masters of segmentation but for potential customers it's quite demeaning. "We know the one feature that you want, but you're going to have to pay for the next tier up to get it. Because we're in charge."
> 
> Imagine if cameras were like cars, wherein you picked your base platform and then specified sensor, software features and connectivity modules. The price might be higher but at least it was due to *your* choices.


I don't think many cars come that way any more, at least not cars from foreign manufacturers in the US. My garage door is not very wide, and over the years I had managed to crash both the side mirrors more than once when backing out. So I wanted electric folding mirrors on my new Audi I bought in December. The package with the electric mirrors was something like $5,000, I think. I decided some of the other stuff that came with that might be neat to have, and I really liked the interior on the particular car I bought, so I'm not unhappy really. If I had wanted much of anything else (beyond upgraded floor mats and the like), that would have been another $5,000 for the next package.


----------



## pulseimages (Aug 16, 2020)

Go Wild said:


> Yeah, but that´s user error, not a camera fault!  They did show some pics that are perfect in sharpness and color. Of course it´s quite difficult to evaluate picture quality from pics in a video on youtube, but we do have an idea how great still image can be from the EOS R6. And it looks quite promising!


I just wish a couple of things were different. 1) That they used either the 28-70 2.8 L or 24-70 2.8 L IS for the review and not the 24-105 4 L IS. I've seen the MTF charts comparing the RF and EF versions of the 24-105 and there isn't a big difference in sharpness. 2) If the R6 is the new 6D then why is it still using a 20 megapixel sensor that the 6D debuted with way back in 2012? Now you have the R at 30 megapixels and the RP at 26.4 and both of those cameras are missing major features.


----------



## pulseimages (Aug 16, 2020)

Jack Douglas said:


> Getting into the same resolution realm, so I'd guess yes. I've followed AlanF's comments on the 5DSR and generally they were very positive without complaints about glass.
> 
> Jack


Well I won't be getting an R5 because besides 3 primes lenses none of my L zoom lenses are on Canon's officially approved list of glass for high megapixel sensors.


----------



## pulseimages (Aug 16, 2020)

Baron_Karza said:


> We'll be waiting forever.
> 
> DSLR - Let's wait for mirrorless....
> R - kinda basic and compared to the completion. Let' wait.
> ...


I'll wait. I got my 6D which is 20 megapixels. I don't see the point of spending more for the R6 to stay at 20 megapixels but only to get IBIS and faster shooting speeds.


----------



## SecureGSM (Aug 16, 2020)

pulseimages said:


> I'll wait. I got my 6D which is 20 megapixels. I don't see the point of spending more for the R6 to stay at 20 megapixels but only to get IBIS and faster shooting speeds.


well, you are much better with R6 sensor at ISO 3200 and higher, there is a second card slot in R6, a better weather-sealing and much higher dynamic ranger - these are some basic, really quick advantages for still photogs.


----------



## Baron_Karza (Aug 16, 2020)

pulseimages said:


> I'll wait. I got my 6D which is 20 megapixels. I don't see the point of spending more for the R6 to stay at 20 megapixels but only to get IBIS and faster shooting speeds.



Go ahead and keep your 60D then. Just seems to contradict what you said in your post that I was replying to below. Seemed you wanted those features. BTW, if those are the only difference you know of, then you really have no clue at all of all the differences.

_"Seeing as this is Canon's first foray into IBIS and 8K wouldn't it be wise to follow the old saying of "Don't buy first generation of anything"? Wait till the second generation when they've had time to work out the bugs."_


----------



## Danglin52 (Oct 17, 2020)

Codebunny said:


> I’ll likely wait for another reviewer. I just seen one on the R5 posted in this thread that was good. What I am after now is a proper written review and not another YouTube personality. Jared Polin can be entertaining, but he can also be a lot of work to watch as he uses a lot of tone shifts and he is dreadfully excitable.


How about this short review. After 16 DAYS shooting wildlife in YNP/GTNP, i have no regrets replacing my 1dx II with the R5 + 100-500 with a few cautions


Battery life, buy the grip and 2-3 sets if you are a heavy shooter. I was getting 650-700 shots per battery, but I have been a bit heavy handed on the shutter.
Memory cards, 45 MB’s chews through memory cards.
Not instant on, be aware of the state of your camera if you want the EVF to be active when it reaches your eve. Canon is going to have to figure out a idle/instant feature for the R1 and R5 II.
AF is really good but can still be confused by twigs and grass even if the eye is visible.
the 100-500 is at least as good or better than the 100-400 II with one exception - restriction of zoom range when using the 1.4x or 2x extenders. You have to extend the zoom to 300mm before you can add the TC and loose the 100-299mm range of the zoom. You are limited to 420mm-700mm when the 1.4 is attached. This is an issue if the subjects moves closer and you need to remove the TC. I was going to sell my 100-400mm II, but I have decided to keep the lens on a second body when using the 100-500 + TC.


----------

