Is the R6 really better than the R..for people like me?

[Coffy83]

First of all the R5 is a dream camera and in every way better than the R. However, this being just a hobby and I having recently bought the RF 70-200 2.8, the RF 50mm 1.2, the RF 35mm 1.8 and the EF 24mm 1.4, I can’t justify spending over 4.000EUR on a camera body. Selling my R and spending 2.500EUR on the R6 is a possibility though.

Even though I am really excited about some of the specs of the R6, I do wonder if it would really be a better camera for me than the R already is and I believe there are a lot of people in my position. I shoot mainly portraits and landscape, nothing fast moving usually. I do 70% photography and 30% filming in documentary style. I have always longed for Ibis in video, 120fps im 1080p and better autofocus in stills. The R6 would provide me with all three of these specs but I ask myself will I sacrifice too much for this?

There are three main points of concern:

- Image quality in stills 30mp vs 20mp. I am expecting the R6 to be much better than the R in high iso performance, lowlight etc. and if so, I would happily sacrifice the 30mp for the 20. However, I do worry though that the high iso performance is not much different and I will only be left with less resolution.

- Build quality of the body. Even though they say the R6 and the R have the build quality of the 6D series and the R5 the one of the 5D series, I remember the R, at the time of release, marketed differently, closer to the 5D series in weather sealing etc.The top screen also suggests that. I really dislike the mode dial on the R6, it reminds me of my rebel/650D days years back. It looks amateurish and seems like a step back from the R. A big point is also that the R has a more high resolution screen than the R6.

- Image quality 4k/1080p video. This might be a surprise to some but I am really doubting that the R6 will have better 4k or 1080p video than the R. Yes it has ibis, it has 4k 60, it has no crop, it has 120 at 1080p and so on. I understand all that but I mean pure image quality. With a few tweaks here and there I have found the 4k image with its 480mbit and All-I of the R superb. Now we are only getting the IPB codec. I have seen a first hands on comparison between the R6 and the 5D Mark IV (which as we know has the same sensor as the R) and they have found the All-I of the 5D sharper and being more detailed as the 4k video of the R6. They also tested the R5 and it was of course the sharpest of the bunch.

I know it’s all early days and we will just have to wait for all the reviews and I hope they will start comparing the R6 more to the R instead of the R5 as this is the comparison most people will be interested in.

...and most of all I hope that my worries are unfounded and I can buy myself this new camera without sacrificing anything

Looking forward to reading your thoughts!

 

[sfericean]

Bro if you want my honest opinion. Keep using your EOS R and save money for the R5 (Forget the R6). Unless you're shooting sports or wildlife its hard to see how the EOS R wont cover everything you need while you save your money for the camera you really want deep down in your heart.

 

[padam]

Basically, you can do some research on the 1DX Mark III and a lot of it will apply to the EOS R6 as the sensor plus processor is almost exactly the same.

-Yes, the dynamic range and ISO are both improved over the EOS R
-Probably not very noticeable, but yes it is the "value-oriented" body, so there is inevitable some cost cutting on this one over the R5.
Other than what you've mentioned, the LCD is also slightly bigger, higher resolution on the R (still acceptable on the R6), but the EVF is similar (possibly a bit better on the R6)
-The camera uses 10-bit 4:2:2 coding and it utilises a 5.1K readout on the sensor, so yes, quality is improved over the R despite the IPB codec, low light difference is probably a lot bigger than in stills mode, as it is not throwing away half of the sensor to shoot 4K video. Even with the codec crippling, it is a big upgrade for video over the R that is the man one, and IBIS is the other huge differentiation if you can make use of it, so just decide if it is worth upgrading and paying for
-Speed is the third big improvement, might not matter for you
-AF is the forth, that might actually matter, it is just more confident with tracking

Since dual card slots are probably not crucial for you, the EOS R is still a fine camera with the better resolution (actually, the battery life is probably quite a bit better than the R6, that IBIS takes its toll) if you prefer to invest in more lenses instead and wait until the R6 starts to drop a little bit (if it actually starts to drop, because it is quite aggressively priced in the first place)

 

[Bert63]

I own the EOS-R. I love the camera and if I'm completely honest I really didn't need to buy the R5 but I can afford it so I pre-ordered yesterday and got what I consider to be a very good deal on a pre-order camera.

I went with the R5 over the R6 for a couple of reasons - the main one being I could afford it but the other being sensor size. I'm shooting birds and critters and I want room to crop. I've owned a 20MP camera and for what I do it was inadequate.

The EOS-R is a fantastic camera - I haven't encountered a problem with it that I couldn't overcome - the slight lag in the EVF during burst shooting for example, or the lag time when the EVF was waking up. After shooting my 7D2 and my 5D4 I had to get used to the slower burst rate of the EOS-R as well, but no show stoppers. In my opinion it produces great images and I enjoyed shooting wildlife with it even though I was told over and over that it was no good for that.

If I had that collection of lenses I'd save and buy the R5 but to each their own. If I went R6 I'd regret the downsize in image size.

That's just me. Enjoy those fantastic lenses whichever way you go.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I have a EOS R, there is little to justify the added cost for the R6, but if you need AF at F22, or 20 fps, then that's the way to go. I wanted the R5, but could not bring myself to pay the price of the camera plus a expensive card reader and new cards just to get features that I probably would not use. Maybe in a year, the situation will change, but the weight is begging to be a factor as my strength in my hands keeps getting weaker.

 

[Chris.Chapterten]

Bro if you want my honest opinion. Keep using your EOS R and save money for the R5 (Forget the R6). Unless you're shooting sports or wildlife its hard to see how the EOS R wont cover everything you need while you save your money for the camera you really want deep down in your heart.

I agree with this 100%. I also have an R and find it to be a great camera for my uses. For stills, and especially landscapes etc. The R should be every bit as good as an R6 if not slightly better. Unless you go for the R5, I wouldn't bother upgrading personally. Enjoy those awesome lenses!

 

[StevenA]

"The R6 would provide me with all three of these specs but I ask myself will I sacrifice too much for this?"

That statement is your whole problem.

"the R5 is a dream camera and in every way better than the R."

This statement is your answer.

I'm with the others. Save up and get the R5. IMO the differences between the R and R6 aren't substantial enough to warrant sacrificing 10mp if landscape photography is part of your hobby.

Instead, consider this:

Sell the R and the RF 50mm 1.2, then buy the R5 and the EF 50mm 1.4. You get the camera you really want, still has a 50mm that will get you by until you can save up to replace it.

Otherwise, just sit tight and wait till you have the $ to feel comfortable to pull the trigger on the R5.

 

[Chris.Chapterten]

"The R6 would provide me with all three of these specs but I ask myself will I sacrifice too much for this?"

That statement is your whole problem.

"the R5 is a dream camera and in every way better than the R."

This statement is your answer.

I'm with the others. Save up and get the R5. IMO the differences between the R and R6 aren't substantial enough to warrant sacrificing 10mp if landscape photography is part of your hobby.

Instead, consider this:

Sell the R and the RF 50mm 1.2, then buy the R5 and the EF 50mm 1.4. You get the camera you really want, still has a 50mm that will get you by until you can save up to replace it.

Otherwise, just sit tight and wait till you have the $ to feel comfortable to pull the trigger on the R5.

Agreed with everything here, except replacing the RF 50mm 1.2 with an EF 50mm 1.4.... the difference is night and day between those two lenses... even as a stop gap, I'm sure you would be dissapointed in the comparative IQ

 

[Maximilian]

My two cent (against your heavy attack of GAS):

Another vote for keeping your current gear right now - esp. all those gorgeous RF lenses. Don't sell any of them until you find out that you don't use them.
Wait, enjoy your gear, learn more about your recently bought lenses, save up money.
Wait one or two years for the prices to drop, look for the reviews, and if the R5 price is in reach, test it first.

Enjoy your current gear, try to enjoy your GAS

 

[Del Paso]

Replacing the R with the R6: no no no !
Replacing the R with the R5: why not !
Keep saving for the R5, or fight your GAS, and keep enjoying the R...

 

[Coffy83]

Thanks for all of your thoughts on the matter. I went through a lot of lenses over the years especially the portrait ones. Owned the 135 2 and sold it even though I really liked it but it was often too tight, I then got the 85mm 1.4 is which was not as good but had the additional is feature which was great for filming on the R but it also was often too tight. About a year ago I got the 50mm rf and the 35mm rf. I found that I only use these two now. 35mm for filming and when I don’t want all the weight and the 50mm for portraits. I sold the 24-105 rf and got the 24mm 1.4 ef instead. To be honest I think I will never sell the 50mm rf, I am so in love with this lens . Last year we went to Kenya for safari and luckily I won the Tamron 100-400 in a foto competition. It served me very well for this purpose, I also appreciated the additional reach of the 4k crop on safari. However, I also sold that lens as I didn’t really need it afterwards. We recently became parents, bought a house etc. so I got the rf 70-200 for filming and future kids stuff. Without isis leaving the 35 rf and the 70 200 rf as my only stabilized lenses. I might consider the rokinon RF 14mm 2.8 af for the really wide stuff in future but I think that’s it for my lens collection. I really considered to only get the 24 70 rf and the 70 200 but I just love my 1.2 and 1.4s too much. I will definitely wait it out for at least until Christmas with the R6...or the R5. You are right, I actually do have the lenses for the R5 more than for the R6. Still really excited that I sticked with Canon all these years and invested in RF...definitely seems to be the future now. My wife has a well growing Instagram page which is our new photographic hobby one could say. It even starts too make a bit of money, not much at all but enough to maybe justify the R5 in a years time...who knows.

This is our Instagram channel if anyone is interested:
huelya_dennis

 

[Ozarker]

Thanks for all of your thoughts on the matter. I went through a lot of lenses over the years especially the portrait ones. Owned the 135 2 and sold it even though I really liked it but it was often too tight, I then got the 85mm 1.4 is which was not as good but had the additional is feature which was great for filming on the R but it also was often too tight. About a year ago I got the 50mm rf and the 35mm rf. I found that I only use these two now. 35mm for filming and when I don’t want all the weight and the 50mm for portraits. I sold the 24-105 rf and got the 24mm 1.4 ef instead. To be honest I think I will never sell the 50mm rf, I am so in love with this lens . Last year we went to Kenya for safari and luckily I won the Tamron 100-400 in a foto competition. It served me very well for this purpose, I also appreciated the additional reach of the 4k crop on safari. However, I also sold that lens as I didn’t really need it afterwards. We recently became parents, bought a house etc. so I got the rf 70-200 for filming and future kids stuff. Without isis leaving the 35 rf and the 70 200 rf as my only stabilized lenses. I might consider the rokinon RF 14mm 2.8 af for the really wide stuff in future but I think that’s it for my lens collection. I really considered to only get the 24 70 rf and the 70 200 but I just love my 1.2 and 1.4s too much. I will definitely wait it out for at least until Christmas with the R6...or the R5. You are right, I actually do have the lenses for the R5 more than for the R6. Still really excited that I sticked with Canon all these years and invested in RF...definitely seems to be the future now. My wife has a well growing Instagram page which is our new photographic hobby one could say. It even starts too make a bit of money, not much at all but enough to maybe justify the R5 in a years time...who knows.

This is our Instagram channel if anyone is interested:
huelya_dennis

You are a new parent. I am a grandfather. Believe me, you want the AF speed and tracking of the R5 or R6 vs the R. That said, I'd save for the R5. That little one will be tearing around at light speed soon. There is nothing more frustrating than missing the cuteness.