Canon EOS R5 Specifications

Michael Clark

Now we see through a glass, darkly...
Apr 5, 2016
2,302
1,289
I currently have a Canon 80D and want to upgrade so whilst my choices are budget limited I have different paths I could take, meaning different brands, but I love Canon. So for me I want to stay with Canon.

The R5 as I said looks fantastic, but I need a Camera for Landscape Photography and I always use a Tripod, so I don't need 4K video, IBIS etc. I've never had a memory card fail in 5 years so I don't see the need for a dual card slot, I'd just like to upgrade to FF and use EF Lenses with better optics and IQ.

There's one thing about upgrading to FF DSLRs that I would miss though (as I'm discounting the 6Dmk2) and that's the articulating screen. I would miss that I think from my Canon 80D, I use it a lot, especially when shooting low or at an angle etc.

It's a feature which has always been excluded by FF Cameras until now, with the 6Dmk2 being the first FF DSLR to incorporate it. I can see why Sports and Wildlife photographers wouldn't need a flip out screen as a lot of their work is done through the viewfinder, if not all. Who shoots action or wildlife in Live View?

But for Landscape Photography I find it really useful, so that's basically the one feature I'd miss.

Don't dismiss the 6D Mark II offhand. It's a LOT of camera for the current price. Other than minimum Tv (1/4000 vs 1/8000), flash sync (1/180 vs 1/200), and build quality/weather and dust resistance (the 6D Mark II is at about the same level as the 80D), it's pretty close to being the equal of the 5D Mark III in most respects. It's better in terms of an RGB+IR meter compared to the dual layer meter in the 5D3. The AF system is one notch lower, just as the 80D and 90D are.
 

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
680
678
Hamburg, Germany
The R5 does sound like a stunning Camera if you need a Camera which records brilliant stills and video, and all of those other features that come along with it, IBIS, dual slots etc.
If you strip those out of the R5, you're left with an R. Which does have the tilty floppy screen.

If you are used to the 80D's base ISO DR and make use of it often by pushing shadows significantly, be aware that it's the one property where the 80D actually outperforms the 6D II. But really only at base ISO and only if you do make extreme adjustments.

If you do though, an R seems to be the most affordable way to get current Canon sensor gen IQ in a FF camera. It also provides a resolution increase over the 80D and ergonomically I at least didn't find it all that different when trying it out in a store.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pj1974

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,483
425
Davidson, NC
I was about sold on upgrading from my T3i to an 80D (although the name sounded like it needed ritalin). But rumors of a 6D successor were about, so I decided to wait and then see which I wanted. That is when I came to this site to follow rumors. I don't ever underexpose by five stops (at least not on purpose), so I have not regretted getting the 6D2. I will bracket and merge shots in Photoshop when dynamic range is beyond what just about any camera can handle well, such as back-lighted landscapes near sunset and dark stone church interiors where I want interior detail without washing out the colors in stained glass. I've also been pleased at how usable ISO 3200 often is. I've not ever had occasion to want autofocus to hone in on a corner of the frame, so the main complaints about the camera don't seem to apply to me. Other than murals on roll paper I do from panoramas, I don't print on paper larger than 13" x 19", so there is plenty of resolution even with some cropping. I try to compose the picture properly in the viewfinder anyway, so not a lot of cropping is typically needed, certainly not on anything I like well enough to print and hang on the wall. YMMV, of course, and if your needs differ much from mine, you most likely know who you are.
 

Rule556

I see no reason for recording the obvious. -Weston
Dec 19, 2019
76
75
Seattle
www.flickr.com
If you strip those out of the R5, you're left with an R. Which does have the tilty floppy screen.

If you are used to the 80D's base ISO DR and make use of it often by pushing shadows significantly, be aware that it's the one property where the 80D actually outperforms the 6D II. But really only at base ISO and only if you do make extreme adjustments.

If you do though, an R seems to be the most affordable way to get current Canon sensor gen IQ in a FF camera. It also provides a resolution increase over the 80D and ergonomically I at least didn't find it all that different when trying it out in a store.
I agree... The R sounds like a great fit for him. I bought my R because I knew I didn't need the IBIS, dual slots, or the video features, and a mirrorless camera with the 5DIV sensor fits my sweet spot perfectly, and at a great price (bought in December during the holiday sale).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chris.Chapterten

smr

I'm New Here
Jan 24, 2017
19
0
Would there be any disadvantage in using EF Lenses with the EOS R though compared to using EF Lenses on an EF Mount Camera and not having to use an adapter... does the adapter mean that an EF lens isn't be utilised at 100 percent of it's performance and IQ ?

If I did buy an EOS R I would have to buy EF Lenses because the RF Lenses are very expensive, too expensive really.
 

SteveC

M6 mk II
Sep 3, 2019
749
564
Would there be any disadvantage in using EF Lenses with the EOS R though compared to using EF Lenses on an EF Mount Camera and not having to use an adapter... does the adapter mean that an EF lens isn't be utilised at 100 percent of it's performance and IQ ?

If I did buy an EOS R I would have to buy EF Lenses because the RF Lenses are very expensive, too expensive really.
The adapter is basically an empty tube, with contacts to pass the signals from the camera to the lens and back again. It's basically an extension tube, from a functional standpoint. You lose nothing optically or otherwise, other than the very slight increased risk of dust and breakage from there being two bayonet points instead of one.

There are fancier adapters, one with a control ring on it for instance, but that just gives you the control ring that (some) RF lenses have and (all) EF lenses don't. Others have drop in filters which can be very handy.
 

CanonFanBoy

Really O.K. Boomer
Jan 28, 2015
4,842
2,814
Irving, Texas
Would there be any disadvantage in using EF Lenses with the EOS R though compared to using EF Lenses on an EF Mount Camera and not having to use an adapter... does the adapter mean that an EF lens isn't be utilised at 100 percent of it's performance and IQ ?

If I did buy an EOS R I would have to buy EF Lenses because the RF Lenses are very expensive, too expensive really.
No disadvantage, in fact, you will find that focus is more accurate. No AFMA needed.
 
Last edited: