A few Canon EOS R5 Mark II specifications [CR2]

[EricN]

Both the R1 and R5II have no confirmed specs published, nor do we have any first hand reports, so how do you know the R1 has better focus, DR and fps?

I think it's an assumption based on the difference from the DSLR era.

 

[EricN]

And he calls himself a wildlife photographer. Ahm! He and his wife are sweet/well meaning people but he is NOT. a wildlife photographer... NO.

I'm not a wildlife photographer either, but doesn't common sense say (all other things being equal) more frames per second will get you more chances for keepers.

 

[sanj]

Both the R1 and R5II have no confirmed specs published, nor do we have any first hand reports, so how do you know the R1 has better focus, DR and fps?

I am clairvoyant, did you not know? R1 will have better fps for sure. That is it's USP. And, it will have better DR just because I say it. [I write in jest, but history is my witness.]

 

[sanj]

I'm not a wildlife photographer either, but doesn't common sense say (all other things being equal) more frames per second will get you more chances for keepers.

Yes, and since many a times animals are behind a branch or backlit or in a cloud of dust, getting shots with perfect focus (in difficult conditions) is something wildlife photographers strive for. Also IQ and focus in low light is important for professional wildlife photographers. (where R1 will be better than R52).

 

[Fischer]

That's not how Roger Cicala saw it.

Maybe, but he confirms the majority view was otherwise than his own.

Also I did not find the MIII's AF to be better than the MII for my photography (I take ten of thousands of pictures of moving subjects and both needed several shots to be sure one was 100%). And while the MIII could take a few more frames/s than the MII both where slow shooters. The biggest challenge I had with the AF was however low light focussing - it was only with the 5Dsr and 5DIV that this improved noticeably. Not even sure the MIII's AF EV leval was lower than the MII but if it was it was insignificant. The new mirrorless cameras with their improved AF are just stunning in comparision; speed, acuracy and low light capability.

 

[Del Paso]

Tony Northrup claims that R52 will be a better wildlife photography camera that R1 because it has more mpex. OH @#@$$
How can he say that??? How can anyone in his position disregard R1's: Better focus, better dynamic range and better fps??? These factors will make it a much better wildlife camera than R52! Besides R1 will have better noise at higher ISO - something very very important for wildlife.

The answer is: Tony Northrup...

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I have no idea where you get that information from?

You just posted it yourself:

Also - small correction - MS and ES in the R5 converge at ISO 800, not above

MS is not better than EFSC in anything

I was not referring to EFCS.
I was referring to MS vs ES.
R5 II will either have fully mechanical shutter or no mechanical shutter.
It won't just have EFCS.
I do use EFCS on my R5 most of the time but this thread is about the R5 II.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

Tony Northrup claims that R52 will be a better wildlife photography camera that R1 because it has more mpex. OH @#@$$
How can he say that??

He is going off the 30 MP "leak".

 

[Quarkcharmed]

You just posted it yourself:


I was not referring to EFCS.

Ok, but the context of the conversation was EFCS vs MS.

I was referring to MS vs ES.
R5 II will either have fully mechanical shutter or no mechanical shutter.
It won't just have EFCS,

EFCS is mainly needed to avoid the shutter shock problem. If the ES in the prospective R5II isn't fast enough so that the mechanical shutter is required, why wouldn't there be an EFCS mode?

If ES is faster than 1/250s and ot can do 14-bit readout at that speed, there's really no need in mechanical curtains. Maybe they should leave a simple mechanism with a curtain against dust.

 

[neuroanatomist]

So I guess in that instance you must just be mounting an arca-swiss plate to the L position? I'd never considered a cage actually

No, the cage (at least the one from SmallRig that is pictured) has built-in Arca-Swiss plates at the bottom and left side, where they'd be on an L-bracket.

 

[Fischer]

I'm not a wildlife photographer either, but doesn't common sense say (all other things being equal) more frames per second will get you more chances for keepers.

MPIX count is more important to most wildlife shooters as reach and framing are key issues - fps has topped out as a significant factor at current camera speeds except for ultra specific shooting. The (possible??) difference between 30 and 45MPIX is however less than I would have hoped for as software such as Gigapixel and Photo AI can bridge a fair amount of the MPIX gap. With 60 MPIX you can often use a 300mm f/2.8 for $$$$ instead of a 600mm f/4 for $$$$$ and have better shutter times - always a crunch when doing wildlife (noise wise you suffer when cropping but again modern software can do miracles with noise when there is enough MPIX to work with). While I understand why camera and lenses are evaluated at "face value" the reality is we all use software that significant changes the utility of both our cameras and lenses. I for instance use far fewer lenses than previously because of the flexibility software offers. So maybe this ultimately shows we need a different way of looking at our gear options.

 

[Fischer]

And he calls himself a wildlife photographer. Ahm! He and his wife are sweet/well meaning people but he is NOT. a wildlife photographer... NO.

Who are you to make that call? Photographers call their own speciality out of ambition, sales, interest or whatever. If you think his wildlife photos may improve provide examples of how you believe he can do better.

 

[Javor]

I just got an invite here in Croatia at one of the largest dealers here for foto and video gear for Canon Touch and Try event...even though no new camera is listed just "old" Canon gear timing is quite indicative as the 21st of May was mentioned as a possible release date for the R5 mark II. Fingers crossed...

 

[neurorx]

I am curious about the eye AF. For those that have the R3 is it really that useful (esp in lower light settings)?

 

[neuroanatomist]

I am curious about the eye AF. For those that have the R3 is it really that useful (esp in lower light settings)?

To clarify, do you mean Eye AF (where the camera detects and locks focus on the subject's eyes) or Eye Controlled AF where your own eye movement selects the AF point?

 

[neurorx]

To clarify, do you mean Eye AF (where the camera detects and locks focus on the subject's eyes) or Eye Controlled AF where your own eye movement selects the AF point?

• Eye AF II will also be added to the EOS R5 Mark II. I was thinking this meant Eye Controlled AF.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Eye AF II will also be added to the EOS R5 Mark II. I was thinking this meant Eye Controlled AF.

I would think not, but since it's just a rumor who knows. Just like there was Dual Pixel AF then Dual Pixel AF II, an Eye AF improved to Eye AF II makes sense.

But to your question about Eye Control AF, on the R3 it works well for me even in low-light situations, though reportedly the performance varies from person to person.

 

[bergstrom]

low light performance better be better than the R6ii's atrocious low light AF. Did an event where it was bright stage lights and then they dimmed the lights and I had to somehow shot people dancing @1/125s f4 iso6400. And spare me the "get a 24mm 1.4" lens, how the hell will that work when I need to zoom in @105mm. Until we get the 16-105mm f1.8 zoom lens, then forget it. And I don't shoot over iso 6400 because even at that , in raw, its still noisy.

 

[Fischer]

I have never met a real wildlife photographer that cares about resolution.. hobbyists maybe, that's why they learn animal behaviour and have big glass. Everything else matters though.

If you check out this video from Jan Wegener - a renowed wildlife photografer - from 15:30 he gives a number of reasons why he thinks more MPIX are very important if you are a wildlife photographer - including reach and noise.

 

[alanphotography]

I am curious about the eye AF. For those that have the R3 is it really that useful (esp in lower light settings)?

If you're talking about controlling AF via your own pupil, I could not get it to calibrate properly on my R3 trial, but I have glasses, so I was getting inconsistent result.

Also I became more aware my eye is not on the subject at all time, even during action, it likes to wonder around to secure the composition and background issues. I would not keep this on continuously or feels like a mad man fixated So this function is mostly useful to me to pick up the subject in a crowd.

Depending your preferences, your mileage will vary, some people love it. Best thing is to go and try it.