• BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

    Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

So is the Canon R5 a bird photography body? (3 Viewers)

mikenott

Flawed but improving!
Now all the specifications are out, just wondered what the thoughts were on whether the R5 is a good bird photography body. See many good things so where does it fit in the Canon 1Dx iII/II, 5D IV and 7DII spectrum? Would you like to own one .......... and will you?
 

colincurry

Well-known member
Looks as though I shall be sticking with my 7D Mkii. R5 is more than I would be prepared to pay. The R6 is much less expensive and I am not really into video; and does look more attractive with many of the R5 specs.

Interested to see how both cameras perform in real (birding) life, and how the EOS adaptor impacts on the performance of EF lenses; and how the pricing will change once the novelty wears off.

Colin
 

marcsantacurz

Well-known member
It will really depend on how the AF system works for small fast subjects. A 40MP system needs great AF to work with moving stuff, and faster SS. Smaller errors show up more. The R6 at 20MP (which is only a 1.4x crop difference) is likely better for BIF and action. They both have the same Digic X processor as the 1dxIII. Both the R5 and R5 have almost 100% coverage of dual pixel AF, which sounds super promising.

I don't know of real world reviews yet. Personally, for the price, I'd hold off until some actual bird photographers do reviews, not just talking heads.

Marc
 

mikenott

Flawed but improving!
One aspect that intrigues me is the possibility of taking stills from video. I have experimented with this on my 1Dii + 600 f4 but single frame resolution was not too good. But with 8K video, images may be comparable to a 20 megapixel still camera?

Also seen some videos showing the eye tracking feature and (on those shown!) it was pretty impressive.

Like edge to edge full screen AF points.

Good fps

Used the Canon R expecting electronic viewfinder to be be iffy - but it was very good.

Speed of autofocus through EOS to R converter with/without extenders might be an issue.

Looking forward to hearing more, but won;t be rushing out to get one!
 
Last edited:

Dave Williams

Well-known member
One aspect that intrigues me is the possibility of taking stills from video. I have experimented with this on my 1Dii + 600 f4 but single frame resolution was not too good. But with 8K video, images may be comparable to a 20 megapixel still camera?

Also seen some videos showing the eye tracking feature and (on those shown!) it was pretty impressive.

Like edge to edge full screen AF points.

Good fps

Used the Canon R expecting electronic viewfinder to be be iffy - but it was very good.

Speed of autofocus through EOS to R converter with/without extenders might be an issue.

Looking forward to hearing more, but won;t be rushing out to get one!

I think over the last 14-15 years that I have had this obsessive wildlife photography obsession the biggest single improvement has been in higher ISO performance and probably one of the biggest frustrations has been the limitations of coverage of the AF points in the viewfinder.
The AF coverage is a huge step forward for me but I will be interested to see just how good the higher ISO results really are. My 1DX2 boasts 100-51200 but the reality is that you don't really want to go beyond 3200 if you want sharp, detailed images, especially if you need to crop as we often do in avian photography.
The equipment we are talking about doesn't come cheap and I'm sure a lot of it in non commercial use ends up in the hands of those who no longer have family commitments i.e. people of a certain age!
The 1DX3 appears to have a lot going for it but for me it's no longer an option. The years are catching up and carrying a brick as well as a big white telephoto is getting increasingly uncomfortable. My 600mm f4 MK2 went and wasn't replaced, the weight saving on the Mk3 not enough, to say nothing the cost of trading up for one. I still have my 500mm f4 MK2 which as yet hasn't been replaced by a lighter version and I now wonder if indeed they will as the announcement of the 100-500 RF lens has just been made. Can the 600 and 800 RF lenses possibly be any good given their price point? They are unbelievably inexpensive compared to the EF versions. If indeed they are capable of taking sharp images I won't hesitate to jump in there. Of course you need an R camera body to use one so the question goes back to which one?
For me, in all probability it's going to be the R5.
Why?
1)The 45mp images will almost certainly lend themselves to more cropping and I definitely like the sound of 8K video single frame grabs giving a sharp 35mp image. Seeing is believing though but if they are as good as the hype who needs 20fps anyway!

2)I think the layout and build quality of the more substantial R5 is more suitable to my outdoor and travel lifestyle .

On the other hand the R6 has twice the ISO range at 100-102,400 and that has huge appeal. My 30mp 5d4 doesn't really give me the expected 50% better cropping potential vs the 20mp 1DX2 so would the resolution on the R5 really be as good as suggested?

In essence the real appeal of mirrorless to me is actually none of the above, what I really want is a silent, and I mean silent, shutter and the benefit of what you see is what you get when you look through the viewfinder. That takes much of the guess work out of correct exposure without having to consult the rear screen.

For those two features I could get a Canon R at a substantial reduction in price although the controls are not as I'd like. Canon aren't daft though, I doubt they have enabled AF at f11 on that body.
Let someone else try and independently test the R5&6 properly and then let me decide. The number of supposedly knowledgable reviews on the internet at this moment in time are all based on reading Canon's own hype and none it appears from having actually tried taking any shots with them.
I'm glad I stuck with Canon, I really think they have pushed ahead of the competition this time and I hope those that jumped ship don't live to regret it. The fact that I can still use all my current lenses is potentially a huge cost saving and the potential weight saving when combining bodies and the new RF lenses offers me hope that I can continue this hobby for at least another decade without taking too many hits on IQ.
Yes, the future looks bright!
 

mikenott

Flawed but improving!
I have to say that I agree with every point you make - it comes with age/experience but having the biggest/fastest/newest is no longer a priority. Personal comfort/usability/age limitations and bang for buck become a higher priority. That's one reason why the R5 + 100-500 looks interesting. I did borrow the Canon R on the recent "try it for 48 hours" from Canon and it confirmed three things to me:

1. The electronic viewfinder has come on leaps and bounds. It was stunning!
2. Auto focus was painfully slow on the tests I did with a 600 f4 and a 100-400. I thought the battery didn't have the necessary poke - I hope the R5 does.
3. Options/setting were quite limited.

I'm not saying its a bad camera - only that it wasn't as good in many ways as my 1Dxii (but better in others) and the 1Dxii is megabucks more to buy.

Really looking forward to seeing some birding reviews, but the eye tracking videos on line look stunning. Like you I wont be an early adopter ;);)
 

Dave Williams

Well-known member
I think the layout and settings options on the R5 are more in line with the 5D4. I had a very quick play with the Canon R a friend was using and I found the menus to be less intuitive than I imagined and it took a minute or two to change his settings to single point from the all of them in use.
Interesting when you start looking at some of the extras you might or might not need too.
The RF teleconverters are eye watering prices compared to the 600mm (£749) /800mm( £979) RF lenses. The 2x is £699, the 1.4x £599 but they do apparently work and AF is possible at f22!! Mind you I'm used to working at a maximum 700mm on a full frame body so I don't think I'd need a TC. Wonder if the EF ones work with the adapter.
Talking of the RF adapter, I tried it with my 70-200f2.8 and I can honestly say it was as if it was on one of my own bodies so I have no reservations about that.
Battery power and shots per charge is an issue though. You will soon use up a full charge at 20fps or 8K video. The battery grip for both cameras is £419 extra but gives the capacity of 2 extra batteries ( and mimics the body's usual grip for hand holding in portrait mode) although personally I would prefer to just have a spare in my pocket anyway.
The latest LP-E6NH battery is priced at £114 compared to the older LP-E6N at £74.99 but delivers 20% more power. Shame it's not reflected in the same price differential although in fairness you can charge the new one directly in the camera. I'd be inclined to look at generic alternatives, Hahnel's extreme version is only £54.Canon are clever though, when they bring out new cameras you find the new charger units included don't charge up older generic batteries.The current Hahnel version probably won't charge.
The CF cards I use for my 5d4 would be pretty useless, the CFast card totally useless ( they came and went in a hurry) to anyone other than 1DX 2 users so I'd need to invest in a few new memory cards.
Yes, more to it than simply shelling out for a new body that's for sure.
 

Chosun Juan

Given to Fly
Australia - Aboriginal
Canon issues media alert to clarify overheating concerns of its eos r5 r6 cameras

Probably just limited to video operations - no news on the photography side. I'm glad they went with a smaller, lighter body style though, I think that was the right decision.

The 5.76Mdot EVF is a nice touch, but I would have liked to see twin CFexpress card slots though, and I really wish they would have done a super lightweight L zoom lens to 600 f5.6. Having the option of those lightweight f11 DO lenses is handy though - it will be interesting to see how those actually work on the R5. (bit depressing that I'd struggle to even carry one of those atm though ....)

https://m.dpreview.com/news/0965339...tm_medium=marquee&utm_campaign=traffic_source








Chosun :gh:
 

willie45

Well-known member
I just ordered a R6 and traded in my 7D2 and 5dIV. I feel Canon finally hit it out of the park with these two (R5 and R6 ) cameras - at least for stills photography. Shame about the heating video if that's your thing but I don't do that.

I'm not sure about the lenses. I love the weight and price, but birds, f11 and the British climate might not co-operate too well.

Am I wrong?
 

Dave Williams

Well-known member
I just ordered a R6 and traded in my 7D2 and 5dIV. I feel Canon finally hit it out of the park with these two (R5 and R6 ) cameras - at least for stills photography. Shame about the heating video if that's your thing but I don't do that.

I'm not sure about the lenses. I love the weight and price, but birds, f11 and the British climate might not co-operate too well.

Am I wrong?

Good to hear someone has ordered an R6, please share your results when you have them!
I'm waiting for others to part with their hard earned before I take the plunge to find out how good these two cameras actually are.
 

Dave Williams

Well-known member
I will share. The only slight worry I have is whether the blackout for BIF might be an issue

Thanks, looking forward to hearing all about it. My initial thoughts were that I would go for the R5 but on paper I'm leaning towards the R6 too. Hopefully better ISO performance the reason. When I think back about all the previous cameras I have bought, ISO performance has usually been the No 1 reason I have moved on, that followed by MP's. However, when I compare the shots my 1DX2 takes vs my 5D4 there isn't a great deal of difference in "crop ability".
The one big reservation I have about both these bodies is build quality. The reason I need to wean myself off the 1D series is weight. They are built like tanks though and ideal for wildlife and travel were knocks are always an issue.I'll be interested to hear your thoughts on both build and the layout of the dials and buttons, menus etc.
 

colincurry

Well-known member
Not sure about the new 600 and 800 mm lenses at f11. Take your point about UK light but I would hope that Canon have taken into account the conditions in the UK and northern Europe, and areas in the USA where the sun doesn't always shine. Bit technical for me but doesn't the size of the pixel help along with improved performance at higher ISO which might offset using f11. Being a walk-around snapper, I cannot imagine ever using an 800mm (unless it were someone else's). In my case, a prime 600 mm might be a bit inflexible

Because you mention the possibility of getting R lenses, I wonder if you still have your EF lenses and are using a converter?

I currently have 7D2, 1.4 iii tc and 100-400 mk2 (as well as other EF lenses). I have tried this combo using the tc and it is ok for static stuff but I find it very difficult to lock on BIF with the limited AF focus points; and the results are not that great. I find it better not to use the tc and crop. I understand that one may use EF lenses with the R6 and a converter - which is great as I will not afford changing my lenses if I go for an R6. As the R6 is FF, I would lose the crop factor that I have with the 7d2 (I know the arguments about this), and, to my mind, I would need my 1.4tc to make up for this and wonder about any consequential loss in quality. I am not sure how auto focus might work using R6, converter, 1.4 iii tc and 100-400 Mk2. It will be interesting to see how real life bird photography pans out when the R6 is being used by people such as you, rather than professional salespeople. I would hope that the performance will at least approach the hype, especially for BIF.

You will see that I want the best of all worlds: the touted improvements afforded by the R6 in itself; to obtain improved performance from my existing glass; and not to have to sell my body for R glass even though, in theory, this should give even better performance than using the converter and EF lenses.

Interesting times....

Colin
 

willie45

Well-known member
The f11 thing is not really an issue for a lot of photography due to the IS/IBIS possibilities, and many people will be very pleased with all the advantages of weight,price etc the new lenses confer, but for twitchy, moving creatures it really does matter.

I intend to use my 400 f5.6 with adapter and reviews suggest no AF penalty for this. The only RF Lens I intend buying is the 24-105 f4.

These are my ideas anyway, but I’m no expert
 

Vollmeise

Well-known member
(...) However, when I compare the shots my 1DX2 takes vs my 5D4 there isn't a great deal of difference in "crop ability".
(...)

Dave, of course there is not the 50% better cropping potential you expected: "(...) My 30mp 5d4 doesn't really give me the expected 50% better cropping potential vs the 20mp 1DX2 so would the resolution on the R5 really be as good as suggested?"

50% more pixels placed in the same sensor size does mean a 22% better cropping potential, as cropping reffers to linear values and those megapixels reffer to the area.

1.22 x horizontal pixels x 1.22 x vertical pixels = around 1.5 x total amount of pixels (or 50% more pixels)

Cheers
 

Dave Williams

Well-known member
Dave, of course there is not the 50% better cropping potential you expected: "(...) My 30mp 5d4 doesn't really give me the expected 50% better cropping potential vs the 20mp 1DX2 so would the resolution on the R5 really be as good as suggested?"

50% more pixels placed in the same sensor size does mean a 22% better cropping potential, as cropping reffers to linear values and those megapixels reffer to the area.

1.22 x horizontal pixels x 1.22 x vertical pixels = around 1.5 x total amount of pixels (or 50% more pixels)

Cheers

If I wasn't so thick I might better understand your explanation but I appreciate the effort to enlighten me. Thank you!
 

Bafty

Well-known member
R6 sounds like the better option to me....

Same AF, same FR, same grip, better low light performance, smaller file size, 2 x SD cards, better crop capability, half the cost of the R5, reduced over heat issues due to lack of 8K, build not as good as R5
 
Last edited:

Roy C

Occasional bird snapper
R6 sounds like the better option to me....

Same AF, same FR, same grip, better low light performance, smaller file size, 2 x SD cards, better crop capability, half the cost of the R5, reduced over heat issues due to lack of 8K, build not as good as R5
I agree with most you say but not sure how you think it has better crop capability compared to the R5, I would have thought it would be the other way around 48mp v 20mp.
 

Essex Tern

🦆🥋🏃🏻‍♂️📷🎹🎸
Supporter
England
R6 sounds like the better option to me....

Same AF, same FR, same grip, better low light performance, smaller file size, 2 x SD cards, better crop capability, half the cost of the R5, reduced over heat issues due to lack of 8K, build not as good as R5

I agree with most you say but not sure how you think it has better crop capability compared to the R5, I would have thought it would be the other way around 48mp v 20mp.

Not so sure about the low light performance advantage either https://youtu.be/V-Y_zJJAFAc
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top