Canon EOS R Series Cameras

wooster said:
Fair enough and I sympathise with your point of view, but if you did watch this particular part of this particular video, you would see there are some fairly telling examples of the point in question.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Click to expand...
I do not watch his video anymore and to be fair, there are plenty of analytical comparisons on the internet for you to look at. I photograph wildlife/landscape as my main genre so I mostly watch videos/reviews which focus around those particular areas.
 
Tysonator said:
I would love to purchase the R5 as a friend of mine has one. The Eye AF is amazing human or animal and tge size and weight is a massive bonus.
As tge R5 is apx £4,500 thatbis a shed load of wedge to spend ( i am no pro ) so the R6 seems to the obvious next choice.
However, I would always wish I had saved aittle bit longer and got the R5 !

Is that a fair reflection ! ?
Click to expand...
there's grey import option for you but for majority of us, R6 is more than enough.
 
I own both the R and R6 for specific uses and find both perfect for what I do.

The R is studio bound. All of the work I do in my shed (studio) is done on the R and mainly using the RF 24-105 f/4 "kit" lens, although that lens is a great bit of kit in its own right.

The R is also used for digitally "scanning" my film negatives, 30mb being more than enough for what I use them for. Via the EF to RF adapter, a Sigma 105mm f/2.8 Macro lens is used for that job.

The R is also used to test all my FD, EF and RF lenses before use on my many Canon A series cameras, my 2 EOS-1V's and the R6.

The R6 is my "outside" camera body which is perfect for anything I use it for.

It, coupled with the RF 800mm f/11 is my go to tool for taking pictures of the moon, hand held with the help of both lens and in body stabilization's.

For me the tracking works incredibly well with any lens I use, normally the RF 50mm, RF 35mm, RF 16mm, I call those three the Nifty Trio and are always in the bag, RF 24-105 and the EF 70-200 f/2.8 II L.

So for me, with about 1 years experience of them both, the R and R6 have found places in my setup that work incredibly well and I am sure will do so for sometime to come.

Looking forward to the R6 update in Dec.

I wish you well.
 
Tysonator said:
I would be so worried about spending a large some of money on a grey import in case I needed to use the warranty !
Click to expand...

The difference in price is approx 1.5k ... should you need a warranty repair (very unlikely in my experience) and got let down by the grey importer (Panamoz being about the best and having a 3 year warranty) then that saving should more than pay for most any repair needed.
 
wooster said:
This video here is interesting. It backs up the one linked in above post 4,429 and certainly made my decision to go for the R5 a lot easier. The relevant part is from 11mins 35 secs

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-Y_zJJAFAc
Click to expand...
At 11 min 50 secs you can see the settings thd comparisons are taken with aren’t the same. The R6 is taken at f2.8 and the R5 at f8. The next comparison is at the same settings. Never really liked those ‘taking photos of books’ style tests. What does it really tell you?

I’m on the fence on R5/R6 at present. I’m thinking of moving from Sony to canon as I want to get back to f4 lenses for wildlife. I miss the long lenses I had with Nikon and can’t really afford mirrorless long lenses so potentially could adapt a canon EF lens (likely a 300mm f4 but would love a 400mm f4). Sony doesn’t have an f4 wildlife lenses. The compact size of the f4 zooms would be a bonus for landscapes too.

At present I’m trying to decide whether to go R5 or R6. R6 makes more sense financially especially as it’s £1849 with the double cash back offer at present but the extra MP of the R5 and potential detail makes me wonder if I will always be what if. the R5 is more than twice the price at present so it should make the decision easier but it’s definitely head v heart.
 
rob-nikon said:
At 11 min 50 secs you can see the settings thd comparisons are taken with aren’t the same. The R6 is taken at f2.8 and the R5 at f8. The next comparison is at the same settings. Never really liked those ‘taking photos of books’ style tests. What does it really tell you?

I’m on the fence on R5/R6 at present. I’m thinking of moving from Sony to canon as I want to get back to f4 lenses for wildlife. I miss the long lenses I had with Nikon and can’t really afford mirrorless long lenses so potentially could adapt a canon EF lens (likely a 300mm f4 but would love a 400mm f4). Sony doesn’t have an f4 wildlife lenses. The compact size of the f4 zooms would be a bonus for landscapes too.

At present I’m trying to decide whether to go R5 or R6. R6 makes more sense financially especially as it’s £1849 with the double cash back offer at present but the extra MP of the R5 and potential detail makes me wonder if I will always be what if. the R5 is more than twice the price at present so it should make the decision easier but it’s definitely head v heart.
Click to expand...
If you don’t mind buying grey, Canon R5 is down to under £2900 body only.

Canon EOS R5 Mirrorless Digital Camera (Body Only)

£3,079.00 - 12 Months<br />Warranty - 14 Days<br />Money Back - 100%<br />Brand New - Free<br />Shipping - Import Tax<br />Included
www.e-infin.com www.e-infin.com
 
cruso said:
What CFexpress Card are R5 users using ?
Click to expand...
I'm using Integral CFExpress 128gb, cheapest by far... I have used this brand in the past and I have no issues with it. My mate his card failed him but Amazon promptly send the replacement card next day delivery and including the package to return the damaged one.
 
rob-nikon said:
At 11 min 50 secs you can see the settings thd comparisons are taken with aren’t the same. The R6 is taken at f2.8 and the R5 at f8. The next comparison is at the same settings. Never really liked those ‘taking photos of books’ style tests. What does it really tell you?

I’m on the fence on R5/R6 at present. I’m thinking of moving from Sony to canon as I want to get back to f4 lenses for wildlife. I miss the long lenses I had with Nikon and can’t really afford mirrorless long lenses so potentially could adapt a canon EF lens (likely a 300mm f4 but would love a 400mm f4). Sony doesn’t have an f4 wildlife lenses. The compact size of the f4 zooms would be a bonus for landscapes too.

At present I’m trying to decide whether to go R5 or R6. R6 makes more sense financially especially as it’s £1849 with the double cash back offer at present but the extra MP of the R5 and potential detail makes me wonder if I will always be what if. the R5 is more than twice the price at present so it should make the decision easier but it’s definitely head v heart.
Click to expand...
Do you crop all 1000s photos you took? This is the question you can really answer your own. R5 may give you flexibility but it come at a cost.
 
robinsslee said:
Do you crop all 1000s photos you took? This is the question you can really answer your own. R5 may give you flexibility but it come at a cost.
Click to expand...
I do crop photos, but usually not for reach. I’m more of a cropper to rearrange composition after getting it wrong in camera. If I composed the images better then I’d hopefully not need to crop. my main output it for viewing on the internet. So far Ive only printed three photos. all prints were under taken between 24mm and 280mm so potentially ok focal length wise.
 
cruso said:
What CFexpress Card are R5 users using ?
Click to expand...
Agfa 512, 256 and Sony Tough 128. The Sony 128 was nearly as expensive as the Agfa 512, and I've seen no benefit in practice so far.
 
robinsslee said:
there's grey import option for you but for majority of us, R6 is more than enough.
Click to expand...

I am not sure about buying the R6 as I have not used one, and would I always wonder should I have just saved that bit longer for the R5 that is my dilemma ! !
My E|OS 7Dii is 20.2MP and I was hoping my next camera would be around 30MP range. Even if I did buy the R5 I would not use 48MP all the time. Perhaps when I shoot macro and some landscape, however I would select a lower resolution file for most of my shoots.
 
I’ve looked at the R6 but I think stretching to the R5 will future proof to an extent and as I can use all my existing EF lenses I am only looking at buying the body and a converter to start.

Neither camera will make my photography better although I’m telling myself they will :)

The R5 is in the basket. I just need to hit “Buy Now”!!
 
Tysonator said:
I am not sure about buying the R6 as I have not used one, and would I always wonder should I have just saved that bit longer for the R5 that is my dilemma ! !
My E|OS 7Dii is 20.2MP and I was hoping my next camera would be around 30MP range. Even if I did buy the R5 I would not use 48MP all the time. Perhaps when I shoot macro and some landscape, however I would select a lower resolution file for most of my shoots.
Click to expand...
Just in case you are interested in the R6 it’s £1849 at camera world

www.cameraworld.co.uk

Canon EOS R6 Mirrorless Camera Body

Whatever you shoot, however, you shoot it, the EOS R6 will have you falling in love with photography all over again. Its blistering speed, low-light sensitivity, up to 8-stop image stabilisation and 4K 60p video will allow you to capture the moment and ad
www.cameraworld.co.uk www.cameraworld.co.uk

I was exactly the same as I was thinking of the R5 but for me the sensible option (especially with the double cashback) was the R6 as it meant more money for RF lenses. They aren’t exactly cheap and I don’t have any EF lenses coming from Sony. May be able to step up to the R5 in a few years once the price drops and a new body is out.
 
Last edited:
Tysonator said:
I am not sure about buying the R6 as I have not used one, and would I always wonder should I have just saved that bit longer for the R5 that is my dilemma ! !
My E|OS 7Dii is 20.2MP and I was hoping my next camera would be around 30MP range. Even if I did buy the R5 I would not use 48MP all the time. Perhaps when I shoot macro and some landscape, however I would select a lower resolution file for most of my shoots.
Click to expand...
I know right, if I don't do landscape R6 is my definite choice... but alas I do both so yeah... darn it... expensive option it is! But I still withholding my 5DsR as second camera body, it's that good.

You won't be able to select lower resolution, but the ability to use cRAW in which the file size reduced dramatically. In fact, plenty of RAW testers been analysing it and found little to no difference at all.
 
Buck said:
I’ve looked at the R6 but I think stretching to the R5 will future proof to an extent and as I can use all my existing EF lenses I am only looking at buying the body and a converter to start.

Neither camera will make my photography better although I’m telling myself they will :)

The R5 is in the basket. I just need to hit “Buy Now”!!
Click to expand...
Do it!!! :ROFLMAO:
 
cruso said:
I am only using the Sandisk extreme pro300 mbs 128 I only shoot stills wildlife and seem to be missing in between shots would I be better of with a

Sandisk 128GB Extreme Pro 1700MBs CFexpress Card ?​

For the Canon r5
Click to expand...
You would not go wrong with that choice :giggle:
 
Buck said:
I’ve looked at the R6 but I think stretching to the R5 will future proof to an extent and as I can use all my existing EF lenses I am only looking at buying the body and a converter to start.

Neither camera will make my photography better although I’m telling myself they will :)

The R5 is in the basket. I just need to hit “Buy Now”!!
Click to expand...
£2899 at E infin, do it.
 
robinsslee said:
I know right, if I don't do landscape R6 is my definite choice... but alas I do both so yeah... darn it... expensive option it is! But I still withholding my 5DsR as second camera body, it's that good.

You won't be able to select lower resolution, but the ability to use cRAW in which the file size reduced dramatically. In fact, plenty of RAW testers been analysing it and found little to no difference at all.
Click to expand...

For me the R5 is the best all rounder and now the new firmware will include motorbike and car AF detection it just got better !
Sure the R6 is amazing and the same firmware update makes it a great sports camera. It is just the 20MP is the issue, plus EVF and screen lower res. As I love doing macro and I want to get in to landscape ( once CV19 has gone ) and travel to amazing places like Thomas Heaton, Nick Page, Brendon Van Son etc.
Then just like you looked at the eos 6DsR as it has no AA filter so images are sharp !
I just can not convince myself go and shed £4,500 plus RF 24-105L, adapter and now we at five half grand and that is still using SD cards USH I

I am sure if I could buy cheap used R6 I would then get it and then buy eos 5DsR as they are apx £1200 ish ATM for land scape and macro. I really do love the animal and human eye AF as it is the best I has used. Sony is a pretty good close second !
The price of 5DsR have gone up in price recently due to some YouTubers using them.
 
Tysonator said:
For me the R5 is the best all rounder and now the new firmware will include motorbike and car AF detection it just got better !
Sure the R6 is amazing and the same firmware update makes it a great sports camera. It is just the 20MP is the issue, plus EVF and screen lower res. As I love doing macro and I want to get in to landscape ( once CV19 has gone ) and travel to amazing places like Thomas Heaton, Nick Page, Brendon Van Son etc.
Then just like you looked at the eos 6DsR as it has no AA filter so images are sharp !
I just can not convince myself go and shed £4,500 plus RF 24-105L, adapter and now we at five half grand and that is still using SD cards USH I

I am sure if I could buy cheap used R6 I would then get it and then buy eos 5DsR as they are apx £1200 ish ATM for land scape and macro. I really do love the animal and human eye AF as it is the best I has used. Sony is a pretty good close second !
The price of 5DsR have gone up in price recently due to some YouTubers using them.
Click to expand...
Only you can justify which camera suits you best.

Gladly I do not watch either of those YTers and there are plenty of social sites and magazines that have plenty of great locations to explore.
 
Quick question - what's the story with battery compatibility and Canon mirrorless? Are third party batteries locked out by Canon, and are they worth it - or is it a case of buy cheap, buy twice?
(I'm looking at cheap power options for time-lapses, figuring swapping a spare battery is the cheapest and most versatile generally)
EDIT: dredging upwards, I think this has been answered, so going with this ... #4,330
 
Last edited:
CavGez said:
Quick question - what's the story with battery compatibility and Canon mirrorless? Are third party batteries locked out by Canon, and are they worth it - or is it a case of buy cheap, buy twice?
(I'm looking at cheap power options for time-lapses, figuring swapping a spare battery is the cheapest and most versatile generally)
EDIT: dredging upwards, I think this has been answered, so going with this ... #4,330
Click to expand...
I'm using third party at the moment so far so good.
 
CavGez said:
Quick question - what's the story with battery compatibility and Canon mirrorless? Are third party batteries locked out by Canon, and are they worth it - or is it a case of buy cheap, buy twice?
(I'm looking at cheap power options for time-lapses, figuring swapping a spare battery is the cheapest and most versatile generally)
EDIT: dredging upwards, I think this has been answered, so going with this ... #4,330
Click to expand...

I've always used Duracell batteries and never had a problem. I have 4 of them for my R5
 
rob-nikon said:
At 11 min 50 secs you can see the settings thd comparisons are taken with aren’t the same. The R6 is taken at f2.8 and the R5 at f8. The next comparison is at the same settings. Never really liked those ‘taking photos of books’ style tests. What does it really tell you?

I’m on the fence on R5/R6 at present. I’m thinking of moving from Sony to canon as I want to get back to f4 lenses for wildlife. I miss the long lenses I had with Nikon and can’t really afford mirrorless long lenses so potentially could adapt a canon EF lens (likely a 300mm f4 but would love a 400mm f4). Sony doesn’t have an f4 wildlife lenses. The compact size of the f4 zooms would be a bonus for landscapes too.

At present I’m trying to decide whether to go R5 or R6. R6 makes more sense financially especially as it’s £1849 with the double cash back offer at present but the extra MP of the R5 and potential detail makes me wonder if I will always be what if. the R5 is more than twice the price at present so it should make the decision easier but it’s definitely head v heart.
Click to expand...
I was at the same point also shoot wildlife, I went for the R5 haven’t regretted it even though it’s way more than I’ve ever paid for a camera
It’s worth it for the odd occasion when you can’t get near enough and have to crop
 
PDub said:
Ive taken 200,000 images on my R6s, ive shot 40 weddings and countless commercial shoots with some being used on billboards. You don't always need 45mp.
Click to expand...
Yes you are right for most things you don’t need 46 MP
It is useful for wildlife photography though to be able to crop sometimes it’s not a controlled situation like other types of photography you can’t always get close enough
 
robinsslee said:
I do not watch his video anymore and to be fair, there are plenty of analytical comparisons on the internet for you to look at. I photograph wildlife/landscape as my main genre so I mostly watch videos/reviews which focus around those particular areas.
Click to expand...

It's interesting with youtube in general. I'm not sure if my perception changed or the content, but I used to find him to be reasonably good but he gradually became worse and worse and their recent videos are now just annoying. As I say, it might be that they were always bad and I just twigged or maybe they've actually degenerated into just looking for more and more clicks
 
Can anyone advise, please? I was about to get the RF 35mm when I pressed pause on my purchase as I like sharp lenses and read that this may not be that sharp compared to my other lenses. So feared buyer remorse.

I'm after a fast low-light lens for occasional use but it needs to meet my desire for sharpness! I have read about the Sigma 35mm F1.4 and it sounds like it may meet my needs for indoor low light work keeping away from four-figure lenses! I already have an adapter.

Does anyone use the Sigma or have anything to add?
 
Iiyama said:
Can anyone advise, please? I was about to get the RF 35mm when I pressed pause on my purchase as I like sharp lenses and read that this may not be that sharp compared to my other lenses. So feared buyer remorse.

I'm after a fast low-light lens for occasional use but it needs to meet my desire for sharpness! I have read about the Sigma 35mm F1.4 and it sounds like it may meet my needs for indoor low light work keeping away from four-figure lenses! I already have an adapter.

Does anyone use the Sigma or have anything to add?
Click to expand...
I'm sure that you can return the lens if they are not up to your requirement (y)
 
robinsslee said:
I'm sure that you can return the lens if they are not up to your requirement (y)
Click to expand...
Fairpoint but I may consider used which means I cant do that.
 
I'm pretty sure that buying on line you always have the option to return?

I have the RF 35 and it's a little cracker - sharper than my 24-105 f4 and no less sharp than my 28-70

The Art lenses are great but I'd certainly recommend the RF primes over them - especially stopped down

Dave
 
Thanks for the replies so far. The reason for a low light lens is I took some low light indoor shots at the weekend with my 24-105 F4 and the ISO was at 12,500. Still acceptable for social media which was the intention. However, it got me thinking as I'm at a friend's wedding in February and he asked me to take my camera along and take some informal photos in the evening. I straight away thought the RF 35MM then started reading reviews..... Great lens but a few reviews commented that it wasn't that sharp...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top