# EOS R5 or R6 Versus 5DMIV for Airshow,Sports and Wildlife thoughts .



## Grunt087 (Jul 27, 2020)

What are your thoughts on going to a R5 or R6 from a 5DMkIV. I photograph Aircraft at Airshows mostly. I have a 5DMkIV and 7DMk2 with Sigma 150-600mm Sport lens. I do not do Video at all so don't worry about 8K video side of the camera. I have lots of EF-S lenses and a few Full frame lenses. My goal is to get extremely sharp pictures of airplanes flying at 300mph going in every direction from far away. Can you use EF-S or full frame lenses with adapters ? Is the R5 45Mp sensor that much better than the 20Mps sensor of the R6 for Still photo's and does it justify the extra cost ? I hear the battery life is only 250 shots which seems very low since I shoot a around a thousand shots per day at a big airshow and use two batteries per day on most occasions. The Cost of the new RF lenses concerns me. I dont want to spend $2500 for an 85mm lens. I need a wide angle up thru 600 mm for ground shots up to far away planes and I cant spend $20,000 on lenses no matter how good. What are your thoughts ?


----------



## AlanF (Jul 27, 2020)

I reserve my thoughts until the R5 and R6 have been properly reviewed. But, at this stage, do your 5DIV and 7DII give you enough keepers of high quality? Would eyeAF, which could be great for wildlife, be of any use to pick up a pilot's eye? The 5DIV will resolve more detail than the R6, and the 7DMkII not much less than the R5. I have never had problems photographing flying planes with your bodies and similar lenses. If your current set up is good enough, don't get caught up in the GAS for the sake of it.


----------



## Aussie shooter (Jul 27, 2020)

AlanF said:


> I reserve my thoughts until the R5 and R6 have been properly reviewed. But, at this stage, do your 5DIV and 7DII give you enough keepers of high quality? Would eyeAF, which could be great for wildlife, be of any use to pick up a pilot's eye? The 5DIV will resolve more detail than the R6, and the 7DMkII not much less than the R5. I have never had problems photographing flying planes with your bodies and similar lenses. If your current set up is good enough, don't get caught up in the GAS for the sake of it.


Agreed. I think that for airshows(which will generally have pretty decent lighting conditions) both the bodies that you already have would perform fairly well. Although there is little doubt that the R5 and R6 have amazing AF systems that will likely outperform older dslr bodies


----------



## Nelu (Jul 27, 2020)

Grunt087 said:


> What are your thoughts on going to a R5 or R6 from a 5DMkIV. I photograph Aircraft at Airshows mostly. I have a 5DMkIV and 7DMk2 with Sigma 150-600mm Sport lens. I do not do Video at all so don't worry about 8K video side of the camera. I have lots of EF-S lenses and a few Full frame lenses. My goal is to get extremely sharp pictures of airplanes flying at 300mph going in every direction from far away. Can you use EF-S or full frame lenses with adapters ? Is the R5 45Mp sensor that much better than the 20Mps sensor of the R6 for Still photo's and does it justify the extra cost ? I hear the battery life is only 250 shots which seems very low since I shoot a around a thousand shots per day at a big airshow and use two batteries per day on most occasions. The Cost of the new RF lenses concerns me. I dont want to spend $2500 for an 85mm lens. I need a wide angle up thru 600 mm for ground shots up to far away planes and I cant spend $20,000 on lenses no matter how good. What are your thoughts ?


For your type of shooting I think the R5 or the R6 will give you no benefits and even more, you'll have to use an EVF instead of OVF, which really sucks, for extended periods of time, in fairly bright light.
You have your cameras, you have your lenses and you don't have to worry about battery life.
To me, it's a no-brainer. Forget about the new cameras and go travel to some air shows somewhere..


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jul 27, 2020)

I just sold my 5D MK IV, its going to UPS shortly. My R is not very good for the type of photos that interest you, I expect R5 and R6 to be greatly improved. However, until we get actual users telling of their experience, I'd take many of those with advanced copies with a grain of salt. If they are too harsh, they will be booted from future advanced copies.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 28, 2020)

Nelu said:


> For your type of shooting I think the R5 or the R6 will give you no benefits and even more, you'll have to use an EVF instead of OVF, which really sucks, for extended periods of time, in fairly bright light.
> You have your cameras, you have your lenses and you don't have to worry about battery life.
> To me, it's a no-brainer. Forget about the new cameras and go travel to some air shows somewhere..




I have an R5 on order, and I currently shoot an EOS-R and a 5D4 and I couldn’t disagree more with your assessment of the EVF. I use mine without issue.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 28, 2020)

Grunt087 said:


> What are your thoughts on going to a R5 or R6 from a 5DMkIV. I photograph Aircraft at Airshows mostly. I have a 5DMkIV and 7DMk2 with Sigma 150-600mm Sport lens. I do not do Video at all so don't worry about 8K video side of the camera. I have lots of EF-S lenses and a few Full frame lenses. My goal is to get extremely sharp pictures of airplanes flying at 300mph going in every direction from far away. Can you use EF-S or full frame lenses with adapters ? Is the R5 45Mp sensor that much better than the 20Mps sensor of the R6 for Still photo's and does it justify the extra cost ? I hear the battery life is only 250 shots which seems very low since I shoot a around a thousand shots per day at a big airshow and use two batteries per day on most occasions. The Cost of the new RF lenses concerns me. I dont want to spend $2500 for an 85mm lens. I need a wide angle up thru 600 mm for ground shots up to far away planes and I cant spend $20,000 on lenses no matter how good. What are your thoughts ?



I shoot both those bodies albeit with Canon glass and not the Sigma. I also shoot an EOS-R. If I chose either of the two new bodies it would be the R5 for the resolution bump and all the other bits that raise it above the R6 - weather sealing, better EVF, better construction - etc, but I don’t know if I would go that way just for shooting air shows.

It would be nice to pair up the R5’s 45MP with the new 100-500L though...


----------



## Grunt087 (Jul 28, 2020)

Thanks for your opinions. I will hold off and see how the R5,R6 work for others. It is tempting to get the latest and greatest toys. If the R6 sensor isn’t a big improvement for image quality I will wait for the next model. Thanks.


----------



## Nelu (Jul 28, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> I have an R5 on order, and I currently shoot an EOS-R and a 5D4 and I couldn’t disagree more with your assessment of the EVF. I use mine without issue.


I have those too and also the 1DX Mark I and Mark III.
I shoot wildlife and BIF and there’s no comparison between the EOS-R and all the others cameras I own and use.
Can I still use the EOS-R for my kind of photography?
Sure, but I still very much prefer the OVF.


----------



## Bert63 (Jul 28, 2020)

Nelu said:


> I have those too and also the 1DX Mark I and Mark III.
> I shoot wildlife and BIF and there’s no comparison between the EOS-R and all the others cameras I own and use.
> Can I still use the EOS-R for my kind of photography?
> Sure, but I still very much prefer the OVF.



Which was my point - to each their own. You stated unequivocally that the EVF sucks and I figured you were referring to the EOS-R. You haven’t actually looked through the new ones to see if it’s still true.


----------



## Nelu (Jul 28, 2020)

Bert63 said:


> Which was my point - to each their own. You stated unequivocally that the EVF sucks and I figured you were referring to the EOS-R. You haven’t actually looked through the new ones to see if it’s still true.


When I stated the EVF sucks, it was specifically for the OP’s kind of photography: air shows.
I think it’s the same for all fast-action photograph. I don’t mind it for landscapes and I prefer it actually for portrait photography.
Not for anything fast, not at all.
For wildlife is the worse because it’s highly impractical to use an EVF as a scope. It kills the battery and it strains the eyes.
Naturally, I was talking about the EOS-R, because I never got my hands on the R5 or R6.
I can only hope it will be better but that’s up to me to decide, not some random YouTube reviewers.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 28, 2020)

Nelu said:


> When I stated the EVF sucks, it was specifically for the OP’s kind of photography: air shows.
> I think it’s the same for all fast-action photograph. I don’t mind it for landscapes and I prefer it actually for portrait photography.
> Not for anything fast, not at all.
> For wildlife is the worse because it’s highly impractical to use an EVF as a scope. It kills the battery and it strains the eyes.
> ...


And for those of us who do use the OVF as part of a ‘scope, it’s at the other end of a long telephoto with battery draining IS. I get very few shots from any DSLR I use because of that.


----------



## Nelu (Jul 28, 2020)

AlanF said:


> And for those of us who do use the OVF as part of a ‘scope, it’s at the other end of a long telephoto with battery draining IS. I get very few shots from any DSLR I use because of that.


Interesting, so only DSLR's suffer from battery drain when using the lens IS, mirrorless cameras don't...never knew that.
Anyhow, what is the point of using the lens IS when:

The lens is on a tripod
The shutter speed for jets, BIF, etc is shorter than 1/2000s ?


----------



## AlanF (Jul 28, 2020)

Nelu said:


> Interesting, so only DSLR's suffer from battery drain when using the lens IS, mirrorless cameras don't...never knew that.
> Anyhow, what is the point of using the lens IS when:
> 
> The lens is on a tripod
> The shutter speed for jets, BIF, etc is shorter than 1/2000s ?


The point is that bird photography with telephoto lens is battery draining when IS is on so you get less shots than the CIPA quoted. I get crap numbers from my DSLRs and even crappier ones from MILCs. BIF is only a part of bird photography, most of us for most of the time shoot perched birds, often in the shade. And, if you don't believe me, there are currently 21,293 posts on the birds portraits forum and 5,932 on the BIF threads here, which is why IS is used.


----------



## Nelu (Jul 28, 2020)

AlanF said:


> ...there are currently 21,293 posts on the birds portraits forum and 5,932 on the BIF threads here, which is why IS is used.


Well, while that might be true, considering the keepers rate for each category, I'm not surprised
Isn't the so-called "Mode 3 IS" on some super-whites supposed to only kick in at the time when the shutter button is pressed all the way? 
I guess that would decrease the time the IS is actually being used, but maybe I'm wrong.


----------



## AlanF (Jul 28, 2020)

Nelu said:


> Well, while that might be true, considering the keepers rate for each category, I'm not surprised
> Isn't the so-called "Mode 3 IS" on some super-whites supposed to only kick in at the time when the shutter button is pressed all the way?
> I guess that would decrease the time the IS is actually being used, but maybe I'm wrong.


It's nothing to do with the keeper rate - they are pretty much the same for me. Mode 3 is used less than you might think. Viewing static targets, when not using tripods, which is the rule for me, we have IS on to keep the subject still in the frame. For BIF, some have IS off or use Mode 3 but I am in the group that uses Mode 2, panning, because it helps keep the bird in the centre of the frame.


----------



## xps (Aug 26, 2020)

The R5 has an much improved AF - photographing persons, animals is a pleasure. The Eye-AF works really great, if the eye is bigger than just a few pixels. 
But for jets and planes the AF of the 7DII and 5DIV are great too. I also prefer OVF, as the EVF drains battery, and you need some spare batteries on the R5 if you shoot PIF (planes in flight) all day long. Actually, here are no big shows, but in the surrounding areas there are some maneuvers, where low level flights are taking place. A lot of time to wait and to drain battery when you follow the jets, to react quickly, if they come near to you. As I´m old, I use an monopod. In most cases my unstabilized shots are super sharp. On the R5 the IS drains a lot of battery, without it - just personally felt - the new batteries last 1.5-2 times longer. But this is just an feeling from using the R5 thre days on photographing jets with my great-grandson.
Also, the AF reaction on non-RF lenses feel quite equal. On the RF 70-200 with starting jets it was really fast.

Maybe, you can rent an R5 with an adapter, or ask one owner, if he lets you shoot some pics with his camera. then you can see, if it is right for you.
The 5DIV is still an very capable camera, and the 7DII is very fast. and in good light conditions, the 7DII will give you great shots.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 26, 2020)

xps said:


> The 5DIV is still an very capable camera, and the 7DII is very fast. and in good light conditions, the 7DII will give you great shots.



Yeah, it's funny how prior cameras don't actually turn to useless junk when newer ones come out! They remain *exactly* as useful and capable as they were before.

Hmm, that might also be true of lenses.


----------



## xps (Aug 26, 2020)

SteveC said:


> Yeah, it's funny how prior cameras don't actually turn to useless junk when newer ones come out! They remain *exactly* as useful and capable as they were before.
> 
> Hmm, that might also be true of lenses.


Of course!
Mostly, experienced shooters who know their equipment by heart, get great pictures - even if they use "outdated" gear. .
One of the CR-forum users has a true writing in his profile: "The best camera is that one in your hand". At bad photographic conditions also the best cameras and lenses fail. And to be honest - if an shot has the "WOW" in its message or its just beautifully composed or hit, it is not impaired, if there are some optical shortcomings.


----------



## zim (Aug 26, 2020)

I would really appreciate someone who has been using the R5 with grip extensively to comment on the number of shots they are averaging especially if using white zooms. 250 off a single battery seems very low to me. I'd be ok using 4 in a day (gripped) but as OP I'm usually 1000 - 2000 photos depending on what's flying.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 26, 2020)

xps said:


> Of course!
> Mostly, experienced shooters who know their equipment by heart, get great pictures - even if they use "outdated" gear. .
> One of the CR-forum users has a true writing in his profile: "The best camera is that one in your hand". At bad photographic conditions also the best cameras and lenses fail. And to be honest - if an shot has the "WOW" in its message or its just beautifully composed or hit, it is not impaired, if there are some optical shortcomings.



If you think about it, bokeh is an optical shortcoming. After all, it's out of focus! Why can't everything be in focus? 

Well, because physics. [If any lurker reading this thinks, well my eyes don't have that problem, you're wrong; almost everything outside of what you are looking at is out of focus and low res, you just don't notice because as soon as your eye travels there to look, your eye focuses on it and the high-res part of your sensor (retina) is trained on it. With photos it's obvious because they won't adjust based on what part of the photo you're looking at.]

The thing is to _use_ that shortcoming to draw attention to what you _did_ focus on., Now I realize that's the first five minutes of the first lecture of Photography-as-art 101 (well, OK, the prof has to do an intro and administrative stuff, but the first five minutes after that), but there it is.


----------



## zim (Aug 26, 2020)

I think if i had an R5, 100-500 + 1.4 extender my current camera would immediately turn to junk, being a 7D


----------



## SteveC (Aug 26, 2020)

zim said:


> I would really appreciate someone who has been using the R5 with grip extensively to comment on the number of shots they are averaging especially if using white zooms. 250 off a single battery seems very low to me. I'd be ok using 4 in a day (gripped) but as OP I'm usually 1000 - 2000 photos depending on what's flying.



It's going to depend heavily on how much time you spend with the viewfinder on as opposed to taking pictures. I guarantee you, having taken enough shots to fill a memory card just for S&Gs, that you can do a LOT more than 250 shots, if you fire a lot of bursts in a couple of minutes, even without a grip. I have no idea what would happen if the viewfinder were to be on for six hours straight with or without taking some pictures now and again.


----------



## SteveC (Aug 26, 2020)

zim said:


> I think if i had an R5, 100-500 + 1.4 extender my current camera would immediately turn to junk, being a 7D



Of course "doesn't turn to junk" is different from "I still use it a lot."


----------



## Grunt087 (Aug 27, 2020)

XPS Thanks that is the kind of reply I was looking to get. I agree the 5Dmk4 will still take good pictures but if I can get Better images with a new camera with the same level of skill on my part it might be worth it. I can see the problem using the EVF. I usually track most of the planes at an airshow thru the lens because you never know when the shot you want will present itself. If you have to watch for the right shot then turn on the EVF find the plane and take the shot you will have missed it. I would have to have the EVF on most of the day. It might come to the point of having a battery belt like the old Video cameras had for TV reporters. I will still wait and see how things work out. Maybe they will have a 5DMk5 with improvements from knowledge they gain from the R5 sensor or autofocus so I can still use the Optical View Finder. It would be nice if someone would report how many shots they get per battery and how long it will last time wise when using EVF all the time at an airshow or sporting event. Thanks everyone's input it is very enlightening.


----------



## Jonathan Thill (Aug 27, 2020)

I have used the EOS R and the RP to cover a couple of Airshows and honestly I struggled with those systems. They are just not fast enough but it taught me it could be done but the hit rate was better with my 7D

EOS R Pics from Abbotsford 








The R5 is a different animal all together and I cannot wait to try it at an actual airshow. With 20FPS I am never going to miss a cross over at Airshow center again. 

The beauty of Airshows is the downtime is predictable so battery life is not an issue as I tend to shoot a lot of bursts and then shut the camera off while I wait for the pass with the best angles. Carrying a few extra batteries is nothing when compared to all the gear I pack for an airshow. 

Lets hope we can get back to shooting them soon.


----------



## cornieleous (Aug 30, 2020)

Nelu said:


> For your type of shooting I think the R5 or the R6 will give you no benefits and even more, you'll have to use an EVF instead of OVF, which really sucks, for extended periods of time, in fairly bright light.
> You have your cameras, you have your lenses and you don't have to worry about battery life.
> To me, it's a no-brainer. Forget about the new cameras and go travel to some air shows somewhere..



I have a 5D4 and R5, and the EVF is way better for bright light and shows you the exposure you will actually get. It has almost no lag tracking fast things. Yes, if you are looking through the viewfinder it will be on a lot and use more battery. This generation of EVF is not like what is found 1-2 years ago.

Battery life is no worse than about a third to half less shots with the new batteries in the extreme cases, particularly with EVF and screen brightness not way up and other conservative settings. To me that trade off for better capability is fine.

The 7D2 is indeed capable of capturing a similar amount of detail as the R5 when comparing cropped full frame field of view vs un-cropped APS-C, but with up to 1.5 stop worse noise. Focusing and IBIS of the R5 I'm fairly certain will produce way more keepers- all my EF glass is better on the R5 than 5D4. So to suggest there is zero benefit to the R5 is not accurate at all I think- its 6 years of technology growth. The question really is if the price vs. benefit to a 7D2 is worth it for airshow shooting. I'd probably rent to make that decision.

I would never suggest an upgrade unless your current camera feels limiting in some way. For me, I always need better low light capability since I do night timelapse with multiple cameras, and the video capabilities are sufficient that I was able to sell my pro Sony NXCAM to pay for a large bit of the R5. I upgrade every few years and keep the backup cam shooting B angles for the timelapses.


----------



## wockawocka (Sep 1, 2020)

For shooting things at a distance? The R5 wins in croppability.


----------



## Stu_bert (Sep 1, 2020)

zim said:


> I would really appreciate someone who has been using the R5 with grip extensively to comment on the number of shots they are averaging especially if using white zooms. 250 off a single battery seems very low to me. I'd be ok using 4 in a day (gripped) but as OP I'm usually 1000 - 2000 photos depending on what's flying.



I've shot over 1000 photos with the R5 in 2 hours whilst testing it. IBIS, Eye AF. I have no grip (yet). I'm sure extended use of the EVF and touch screen would be different, and that wasn't with the big whites (I don't have any of those with me in HK, sorry). But honestly, doesnt bother me carrying around a few extra batteries, but I also appreciate others dislike it.

Start another thread, and I am sure people will contribute and fill in gaps.


----------



## JayLT (Sep 2, 2020)

Regarding the R5 in terms of battery life, I was out this weekend with mine at a local wetland preserve testing a couple different lens combinations and settings. I had the battery grip, with two batteries installed. I racked up 2200 shots in 2-3 hours and both batteries were still at 67-70% charge. Not as good as either of my DSLR bodies, but really not too far off either


----------

