Opinion: The R5 Mark II sounds cool – but where’s my Canon R5s?
- Thread starter Richard CR
- Start date
At this point in time, I think that we will be relieved to see any new body that canon deigns to release! 
Upvote
0
In fact, because the RF16 requires digital corrections, it'll benefit from a higher-resolution camera. The corrections will be less noticeable.Oh no....it will expose the weakness of my RF16
Upvote
0
Sadly there are pretty much no native 1:1 macro lenses for ‘medium’ format. I’m to attached to electronically controlled aperture to give that up for the extra megapixels.
Upvote
0
I've patiently waited for the R5s, buying Canon cameras and lenses since the REBEL.
I was tired of waiting and opted for the GFX100S and lenses. Medium format rocks. My 5DS and 5DSR are my backups.
I may pick up a used R5 after the mkII comes out.
I was tired of waiting and opted for the GFX100S and lenses. Medium format rocks. My 5DS and 5DSR are my backups.
I may pick up a used R5 after the mkII comes out.
Upvote
0
Due to DPAF the pixel size has direct impact on the AF performance. This is a trade off of high pix cameras. R6 is focussing down to -6.5, R5 to -6 and R7 to -5EV. Keep this in mind when asking for more pix.
Upvote
0
About the lenses: Youtuber Chris Frost, a channel which does lens reviews, has a habit of (re)testing different types of both EF and RF full frame lenses with a test chart with an R7 which off-course is the camera with the highest of megapixels per sensor area in the RF system. While the high end primes typically cope well the L series zoom lenses show more mixed result. Off-course any high resolution sensor will achieve better resolving. But if many lenses still limit that potential, and other trade-off also come with such a sensor I get it why this might not be on top of Canon's priority list. Maybe they also first want to further develop the RF system like the EF system, have some mark II versions of some current L series lenses on te market, before releasing such a camera.
Upvote
0
I'm going for the Fuji GFX system and a whole set of lenses.
- FujiFilm GFX 100 II
- FujiFilm GF30mm T/S
- FujiFilm GF500mm
- FujiFilm GF250mm
- FujiFilm GF100-200mm
- FujiFilm GF45-100mm
- FujiFilm GF20-35mm
- Laowa 20mm f/4 Zero-D Shift Fuji GFX
- Laowa 15mm f/4.5R Zero-D Shift Fuji GFX
- FujiFilm GF 1.4x TC WR converter
Upvote
0
I don't get why people always have to jump bandwagons for a mediocre bump in resolution. The megapixel race is ridiculous, always has been, that's why Canon doesn't participate and still releases flagships with just 24 MP. Because they don't want to sacrifice more important specs just for high-res. Fujifilm cameras have abysmal burst speeds, below-average autofocus and a mechanical shutter speed of just 1/4000. Not to forget rolling shutter. The R5 is just as good as the GFX 50S II with way better speed and only minimal loss of resolution.
You're spending the equivalent of a Tesla Model 3 for what? Some more pixels that absolutely nobody will notice (but you on 400% zoom).
Regarding the main topic, I think Canon is gearing up for the launch of the R1 and R5II. Also releasing an R5s would take too much buzz out of these launches. But I'm sure at some point we might rather see the R7 sensor as full frame, which would be 82.5 MP. Maybe next year, who knows.
Upvote
0
Maybe he just values resolution more than AF and shutter speed?
That is probably why he wants to get a GFX 100 II, and not the 50S you are comparing to R5.
We all photograph different things and have different needs. Most landscape photographers I know never shoot faster than 1/4000 and most sports photographers I know don't need 100MP for their work...
As for the 30.000... I've spent waaay more than that on Canon gear.
Upvote
0
That is a long list of assumptions you've made there. Burst speeds and autofocus mean very little to me, since I mostly shoot manual tilt shift lenses and do architecture and landscapes.
I print. Very. Large. Formats. Huge ones actually. I've sold multiple photo wallpapers just this year, not to mention many framed prints. If I'm printing a 40 ft wide photo wallpaper for a public space, then I really DO need those megapixels because people will come up to them and see the image quality - not just me on 400% zoom. Just the other day I completed editing on a 27 gigabyte photo that has a 130,000 pixel width and can be printed at 300 dpi to 30 feet wide.
I can't remember the last time I needed 1/4000s shutter speed.
Finally, it's not just the resolution, but also the dynamic range. While the R5 was a big step forward compared to 5D series cameras, it's still behind the medium format.
Because I will adapt some of my Canon TSE lenses, I will also profit from the extra width of the medium format frame, meaning I won't have to stitch as often as I do now.
And finally, I will still keep my Canon R5 and a full set of lenses; might even get the R5mkII as a backup and as a video camera for the shorts and reels that I occasionally do for my clients. But instead of pouring more money into a Canon system, I will be adding the Fuji GFX - not because I want to, but because Canon doesn't have and will not have for god knows how many years, a sensor that I need.
Upvote
0
AH, must be feeling so proud to use a worn out meme instead of offering something constructive. Clever!
Also, just in this thread you can see others are also choosing Fuji for the very same reasons I've listed. Canon didn't care when people started jumping over to Sony either. That's why 7 years later Canon is still playing catchup with them...
Upvote
0
Sounds like a great system, and you must be successful indeed to afford that new investment while keeping a full suite of Canon lenses for your R5. I'm sure you'll take some excellent images with the Fuji.
When you do, please feel free to come back here and post some of those images as comparisons with results from the R5, so we can all understand better the benefits you are getting with your new system. Looking forward to them.
Upvote
0
Is that the most important metric of FF cameras sold on a october tuesday, in Hokkaido, before noon? Or the totally unimportant global sales metric?
Upvote
0
You must be pretty heartbroken. You never fail to point out that Canon is still making money when a forum member is dissatisfied with them.
For me personally it is more important that a product meets my needs and helps me make money. Otherwise I would just donate to the company with largest revenue.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
