Why the 5D Mark V?

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,577
679
Southeastern USA
Canon apparently plans to release a 5D Mark V. But which photographers will comprise the market for this camera? And why does Canon want to sell another version of a body that cannot use Rf lenses?

The 5D IV is a great camera. But it won’t take Rf lenses. Ever. Until Canon develops an EVF that is truly great for action photography, I won’t give up my own 5D IV. But why would I want to invest an expected $3300 in an upgraded version of what I have when Canon is also signaling that a pro-level R is in the works? I would expect, for some time after a 5D V is released, the 5D IV will still be available for about $1000 less.

And once that magic version of the R is released, the one with an action EVF, two slots, better weather sealing, faster burst rates, etc., how much interest can a 5D V be expected to maintain? Who will still be buying the 5D V then?

The reason I put this out for discussion is because, as a photographer who is entering a new cycle of event and portrait work as a professional, I have a dilemma. My R is great for portraits, but it isn’t so great as a second body for events which include subjects moving faster than turtles. But the idea of buying another 5D IV that CANNOT use Rf lenses is frustrating. And I don’t expect the “magic R” to appear for another two years.

Like many working photographers, I’d like to be able to carry two cameras, one with a wider lens, one with a longer lens, that can capture whatever equally as well. Two (current) R’s is a non-starter!

I do believe that there are other photographers in this forum who understand what I’m talking about. Carrying two cameras is not all that fun, but it works and gets the job done better than swapping out lenses too often! Carrying three cameras, though, so I can use Rf primes which can’t be matched by anything EF, just isn’t practical.

Obviously, a 5D Mark V will also not solve the problem of not being able to use Rf lenses, so what is the point?

Ok, this isn’t an existential crisis, and I know I’ll likely be reminded of Canon’s industry dominance and implied omniscience, but, really, how long does Canon plan to have parallel lines? What is their end game here? Are they simply trying to sell off massive stocks of EF lenses? Are they worried that whatever EVF they produce will still not be appealing to large numbers of dSLR customers? Or is Canon, in fact, lacking a clear roadmap, just kind of muddling ahead in what is, arguably, their most challenging era to date?

Believe me, I don’t see any of Canon’s competition as having anything better to offer as a complete solution. I’m not singling out Canon as somehow being behind the curve. But Canon is “my” camera company, and, until recently, they have been pretty easy to understand. Even for me!
 
  • Like
Reactions: navastronia

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,347
741
I may buy 5D5 even if the only lens I would be using it with were 100-400.

I am not interested in eye autofocus; for the subjects of my interest, I prefer the whole heads to be in focus. I also find "point and recompose" much more convenient than "touch and drag". I am interested in CCAPI support, though, and while I would prefer Canon to backport it onto 5D4, I don't expect that to happen.

While I appreciate the ability of the EVFs to mark overexposed areas, I find their inability to show by how much they are overexposed a huge drawback.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanF

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
741
107
Fair questions.

I'm sure Canon has clear plans - but having clear plans doesn't mean you can't also have a few possible routes, and even destinations, on the roadmap so you can make a choice later once you have more information about what looks like the best path.

My guesses are:

1. Despite the mirrorless hype on the internet, yes, I think it's possible Canon may think a significant part of the market which will continue to choose OVF over EVF (or at least over any EVF that can be produced at an acceptable price) for the foreseeable future. And the RF lenses may be good but most of them are very big and expensive - who knows what Canon can produce for EF mount if they adopt the same approach to size and cost. (And beng honest, I'm yet to be really blown away by the RF lenses. They may be sharp, but I struggle to see the value in most of them at current pricing, based on how I perceive their overall IQ compared with other options. But then again, I'm still a big fan of the 135L :) )

2. Canon may genuinely think there are some things which a DSLR is still going to do better than a mirrorless for the time being. In that regard I think it will be very interesting to see what technology is in the 1Dx III, eg what it's AF system is like.

3. As much as Canon may want everyone to buy RF lenses, they may think that if new buyers are looking at the cost of an R body and RF lenses, a significant number might decide to stick to their smart phones. Good camera bodies which can be paired with EF lenses which are at least cheaper than their RF counterparts if bought new, and which can be had on the second hand market for less, makes the overall cost of owning a setup more palatable. I realise the 5D series cameras are not cheap so you may think buyers will have money to spend on lenses too, but that may not always be the case. Anyway, Canon may think this is a part of the market is worth servicing. [Edit: Pepole can use an R body with EF lenses of course, but I'm talking about servicing that part of the market with something native to the EF system, ie no adapter required, which may or may not bother some potential buyers.]

Will be interesting to see what the next few years brings!
 
Last edited:

JohnC

EOS M50
Sep 22, 2019
46
39
Gainesville,GA
Interesting topic and a good question. Recently I bought the M6 Mark II, and did something I rarrely do...walked around using AF and shooting things that move (I'm a landscape shooter). I was pretty darn impressed with the ability of the M6 Mark II in both image quality at "higher" ISO settings as well as its ability to track moving subjects using the optional EVF. I wrote a review in the M section of the forum illustrating my thoughts on the body.

Then I started using adapted lenses more (100-400 v1, Sigma 150mm macro) while shooting the same types of subjects. Obviously image quality was better even if AF didn't perform as well as with the native EF-M glass. I got to thinking however, am I doing a fair comparison since I've never used the 5D Mark IV in this manner? I had shot subjects like this before in years past, but using a 5D Mark II...and there is a world of difference in FPS as well as AF ability between that and the Mark IV.

So the past few days I've been using the 5D Mark IV and comparing the OVF feel vs. the EVF of the M6. From a strictly user oriented standpoint I find the Mark IV more enjoyable to use. I also find it far easier to both find and track moving subjects. From a AF tracking standpoint I think the M6 gets the edge, but primarily due to the area in the viewfinder being nearly 100% usable vs. a far smaller area of the 5D IV in which tracking can occur. Even with that limitation however, I think the results overall from the Mark IV are better and I attribute that primarily to the OVF being easier to use in those situations.

Now for my primary shooting, I'm not sure there is such a difference between mirrorless and mirrored bodies. More often than not I'm focusing manually with liveview in the first place. Additionallly, I shoot landscape with manual focus Zeiss lenses almost entirely (except 70mm and up where I use a 70-200 fL). For that specific case I could go either way, BUT if I go mirrorless I will be using an adapter as I'm not very likely to give up my Zeiss glass. From that aspect it would be simpler to stay with the DSLR, although a mirrorless body would definitely work as well.

What could they do with a 5D Mark V that would cause me to upgrade from the Mark IV. Well really there are only two areas for my use that would create that situation.

Better DR... and by that I mean ability to recover shadows further without banding. The Mark IV is really nice in this regard compared to previous iterations, but based on my testing the sensor in the M6 Mark II is even better when you take the character of the noise into account (over 4 stops recovery with no banding at all in my tests). Would this newer technology find its way into the Mark V? I suspect so but we don't know until it is here.

More resolution - I know many don't want more and I can certainly understand that perspective. For a landscape shooter though the downsides to having more resolution are reduced. I don't shoot hundreds of frames in a session, so file size and storage are not an issue. Not that I crop a lot in most cases, but where needed having more initial resolution leaves you with more after cropping and that can't be a bad thing. Will the 5D Mark V have more resolution? My guess is yes but it is entirely possible it won't be enough more to make me change. I would say that depends entirely upon whether the 5D series stays more as an all-rounder or becomes a resolution beast like the 5DS. I could see this going either way as it would allow Canon to focus a particular series on that part of the market.

For me personally, for landscape shooting the decision on whether to go mirroless or remain DSLR will depend on those two things. There are rumors of a hi-res R version coming. If so, and there is no DSLR counterpart to that... I'll end up mirrorless and keep the 5D Mark IV as a backup/action shooter.

**I do see some benefit in using adapters with EF mount lenses, particularly with the ability to have a drop in CPL as I use one frequently. I also use ND filters, and sometimes still use a 3 stop SE grad to capture more information in the raw file. So I would still be looking at a front mounted filter system in some situations, but far easier to have a drop in CPL with a front mounted square ND or rectangle GND vs. having to add a 105mm CPL on the front as well. This aspect would be a nod toward mirrorless if everything else is equal.

I can see reasons for them to continue with both types of bodies, at least for the time being. I do think once EVFs are able to perform very close to OVF you will see the DSLR start to fade away. Perhaps Canon recognizes that technology is not quite there yet, and aims to have products that fit both types of shooters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger
Mar 14, 2012
2,301
189
I'm in a similar situation -- straddling between the EOS/EF and EOS R/RF ecosystems. The 5D5 is required because the Nikon D850 exists. Canon needs something for people that what to stay with EF that will compete with the newest Nikon and Sony offerings. There is also a log of EF glass in the world and abandoning development in the EOS ecosystem doesn't make sense.

I think Canon has intended to iterate to the 5D5 for years, but I wouldn't be surprised if the 5D5 and IDX3 are the last in their lines. Canon's mirrorless tech is catching up so that in a few years, there will be very few reasons for opting for the optical/mirrored versions, but I still expect that battery life will still be better for the 5D line than the R. And that fact matters a lot to wildlife and to those that prefer the feel and experience of the optical VF and mirror.

You also have to remember that we are now entering year 2 of the R-ecosystem. It is only because the RF lenses are so good that people talk about and buy into the R. Better this way than Nikon, which has the more feature-rich bodies with pricey f/1.8 lenses and an excellent D850... The most flexible set up is having R bodies and a mix of RF and EF lenses, but it really needs to have pro Rs to replace the 5D and 1D lines. I won't be buying the 5D5, but if I were older with a large stable of EF glass and had an older 5D body, then it'd make a lot of sense to upgrade to the 5D5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,016
114
I agree that it’s a crossroads. I’d say that the 5D4 is probably the best all-purpose camera I’ve ever used. I’m also pretty heavily invested in the EF system. My interest in a potential 5D5 may be partially dependent on what they do with the next R.
 

unfocused

EOS 5D SR
Jul 20, 2010
4,991
1,343
66
Springfield, IL
www.mgordoncommunications.com
...how long does Canon plan to have parallel lines?
For as long as the market dictates.

What is their end game here?
To continue to be the Number One camera manufacturer in the world and to make a profit for their shareholders, employees, future R&D and future acquisitions.

Are they simply trying to sell off massive stocks of EF lenses?
No

Or is Canon, in fact, lacking a clear roadmap, just kind of muddling ahead in what is, arguably, their most challenging era to date?
They are a business. They can't see the future. They are studying the market and laying the groundwork to respond to changing market conditions, while protecting their existing market. That's not "muddling ahead," it's smart business strategy.

I don't know why so many people on this forum subscribe to the theory that Canon is trying to drive the market toward Mirrorless vs. DSLR. They are happy to sell you any camera configuration that will be profitable for them. There is not now and will never be "one camera to rule them all." Instead, life is full of choices and compromises. That's not Canon's fault or failure.

Now, to further respond, just what does this mean:

My R is great for portraits, but it isn’t so great as a second body for events which include subjects moving faster than turtles.
What kind of events are you shooting that you find the R too slow for? Because I use the R as my main event camera and the 5DIV as the second body and I'm not shooting turtles.

Of course, if it's sports, I use the 1Dx II. But, these days, it goes pretty much like this: Sports--1Dx, Everything else -- First body R, Second body 5DIV.

Yes, it is a pain to carry three bodies and I've gone to taking two bags into the office. One with the 1DX prepped for sports and one with the R and 5D, prepped for everything else. On the plus side, with two bags, I can keep more lenses close at hand if the need arises. But, I'm not blaming Canon for giving me more choices and tools that meet my needs.
 
Last edited:

SteveC

M50 & T6i
Sep 3, 2019
348
197
Written from a different perspective--someone who does not have a full frame yet, so the question of whether it's worth the upgrade is moot:

It would appear that if your interest is NOT fast action of some kind, there's simply no reason not to go mirrorless. (Unless battery life/two slots is critical.)

If it is fast action, and you need a FF right now then go with the current 5 or 1. If you can wait, wait and see what comes out in R-land.
 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,519
748
Its a good question, but its because of demand and support for those with huge amounts invested in EF lenses and accessories. I have a R and a 5D MK IV and just use the EF lenses on my R. I don't own a RF lens. I think that many are like me, I may eventually buy a RF lens for walk around, but my EF lenses will be used for a long time. When I stop using a DSLR, then RF lenses will make sense for me to buy. I don't plan on getting a MK V though.
 

SteveC

M50 & T6i
Sep 3, 2019
348
197
Its a good question, but its because of demand and support for those with huge amounts invested in EF lenses and accessories. I have a R and a 5D MK IV and just use the EF lenses on my R. I don't own a RF lens. I think that many are like me, I may eventually buy a RF lens for walk around, but my EF lenses will be used for a long time. When I stop using a DSLR, then RF lenses will make sense for me to buy. I don't plan on getting a MK V though.
Similar thinking to mine.

Except that I am ALSO using M series, so for very expensive lenses it will continue to make sense to hold onto, or maybe even buy EF lenses because they can be used in both systems.

If I buy a Big White, for instance (and the $500 rebate on the 100-400 mm L is definitely yelling in my ear right now), it'd be nice to have it be something that works on everything I own.
 

JPAZ

If only I knew what I was doing.....
Sep 8, 2012
925
37
Context....I am not a "professional" shooter, just a very involved hobbyist. My main body has been the 5Div and a group of EF lenses to go with that. I moved to the RP as my "backup" because it is a bit smaller and lighter and I was unhappy with the output from the various M bodies I'd tried or owned. Moving to a FF secondary body was a no-brainer since I could sell my M and EF-M to just about break even.

What I've noticed is that I use the RP a whole lot more than the 5Div. I am not ready to give it up but an Rx with 2 slots and better performance for action or BIF could win me over. So, I guess I'd not move to the 5Dv.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,577
679
Southeastern USA
Context....I am not a "professional" shooter, just a very involved hobbyist. My main body has been the 5Div and a group of EF lenses to go with that. I moved to the RP as my "backup" because it is a bit smaller and lighter and I was unhappy with the output from the various M bodies I'd tried or owned. Moving to a FF secondary body was a no-brainer since I could sell my M and EF-M to just about break even.

What I've noticed is that I use the RP a whole lot more than the 5Div. I am not ready to give it up but an Rx with 2 slots and better performance for action or BIF could win me over. So, I guess I'd not move to the 5Dv.
Yes, I know what you mean--though I have the R. We keep seeing the word "hype" used with mirrorless here lately. And, yes, there is some exaggeration and marketing spin about how great it is, but once I started using the R, then switch to the 5D IV, I actually miss seeing the exposure exactly as it will be produced in the captured image. If I hadn't owned the R for a while, I'd roll my eyes and think, "What a joke, these people using mirrorless want the camera to do everything for them. A good photographer should know his/her settings, understand exposure well enough to not have to rely on some kind of preview." Yeah, right.

And, of course, no AFMA is pretty wonderful when shooting at f/1.2! And the precision of the AF on the R is far beyond the 5D IV. The only PITA for me is the jerkiness of moving subjects. (I've tried all the setting combinations.) Results are usually good, even when I'm just kind of guessing which way to track movement, but it is still hard to be confident. And the problem is worse using EF lenses with an adapter.

Regarding the "hype" again, I can see why camera companies are excited. For photographers who started back in the film days, and who haven't used Live View much, good exposures are a learned skill. Many such photographers nail exposure without a thought in nearly all lighting situations. But for those entering photography today, who have had smartphones growing up, or who just don't want to take the time to really learn all about the exposure triangle over several years of gaining experience, here comes mirrorless with WYSIWYG EVFs! It's a great tool, and it's a shortcut to taking properly exposed FF images without a whole bunch of trial and error. So, sure, camera companies love it, and they think new photographers will too.

At this point, however, as many have pointed out clearly in this thread, there are things dSLR's do better, and we are in a transition period. This is a time to be patient and excited and grateful for all the choices. That said, for this photographer, having a mirrorless that performs as well as a 5DIV for action is something I'm looking forward to!

I do have an 80D, but years ago I tried using a cropped-sensor as a backup camera to my FF, and it was just to frustrating in low-light situations. The 80D is a lot better than the 60D, for sure, but I wouldn't use it as a backup or second shooter. At this point, it is for personal travel and fun, and it's a camera my older kid can start using in a couple of years. Sure, in a true pinch, it would definitely produce adequate images. I am a FF snob, admittedly (which is why I really roll my eyes when I hear HYPE about micro 4/3).

While I hear, you, unfocused, proclaiming strong faith in Canon's ability to track the market right now, I personally don't believe they or Nikon or Sony have a clear idea of what will sell from one quarter to another. Sales are headed down across the board at an alarming rate; we might have finally reached a point where the conventional wisdom has been played out. We'll see!

Remember, smartphones don't only take photos, they steal people's time like no other device ever invented. Whole aspects of socializing, of any type of group interacting outside of work or school are weakening at their own alarming rate. And people don't feel the way they used to about being photographed. Sure, selfies are an obnoxious rage, but when folks see a big dSLR pointing at them or their kids, alarm bells go off, tempers rise, and people suddenly want complete control over their own images!

"Muddling ahead" was, perhaps, an unnecessary way to describe how Canon and the industry as a whole are making decisions. Yes, they are using experience and data the best they can, hopefully, but I believe we are all entering uncharted territory, that in many cases we either make new maps or get stuck in a rut.
 

Kit.

EOS 6D MK II
Apr 25, 2011
1,347
741
but once I started using the R, then switch to the 5D IV, I actually miss seeing the exposure exactly as it will be produced in the captured image.
Do you always use the same shadows and highlights compensation values in your final images? If not, EVF cannot be WYSIWYG to you.

And if the brightness level of the scene is much different from the brightness level of the EVF, your eye may be misadapted to the EVF image brightness when it's most needed.

Both of this is even worse with the smartphones, which don't have EVFs to shield the display from the ambient light.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Michael Clark

Peter in Boulder

EOS 70D & Fuji X-E3
Aug 21, 2019
2
1
I'm not in the market for a 5D MkV, but if I was, I wouldn't have any reservations because my EF lenses will be around long after the 5D MkV has come and gone. My shift to RF doesn't really need to happen until I finally need a lens that is only offered in RF mount.
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
[QUOTE="YuengLinger, post: 800727, member: 1425]

comes mirrorless with WYSIWYG EVFs! It's a great tool, and it's a shortcut to taking properly exposed FF images without a whole bunch of trial and error. So, sure, camera companies love it, and they think new

[/QUOTE]
There may have been some practical truth to this ten years ago, but now with the intelligence and accuracy of the dslrs metering coupled with the available DR it's just not an issue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gwooding and pj1974

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
741
107
Yes, I know what you mean--though I have the R. We keep seeing the word "hype" used with mirrorless here lately. And, yes, there is some exaggeration and marketing spin about how great it is, but once I started using the R, then switch to the 5D IV, I actually miss seeing the exposure exactly as it will be produced in the captured image. If I hadn't owned the R for a while, I'd roll my eyes and think, "What a joke, these people using mirrorless want the camera to do everything for them. A good photographer should know his/her settings, understand exposure well enough to not have to rely on some kind of preview." Yeah, right.

...

Regarding the "hype" again, I can see why camera companies are excited. For photographers who started back in the film days, and who haven't used Live View much, good exposures are a learned skill. Many such photographers nail exposure without a thought in nearly all lighting situations. But for those entering photography today, who have had smartphones growing up, or who just don't want to take the time to really learn all about the exposure triangle over several years of gaining experience, here comes mirrorless with WYSIWYG EVFs! It's a great tool, and it's a shortcut to taking properly exposed FF images without a whole bunch of trial and error. So, sure, camera companies love it, and they think new photographers will too.
Interesting how easily you've been turned to the dark side! :)

Seriously, I see comments like this and wonder if I should really give EVFs more of a chance. I guess it's pretty liekly I will end up with one one day. The thing is though, I spend a large part of my working life looked at screens, and I look at screens when I processing photos, and when I read things on the internet, etc. No matter how good EVFs may become, I'm just not very keen to spend any more time looking at a screen!
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

jd7

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 3, 2013
741
107
Written from a different perspective--someone who does not have a full frame yet, so the question of whether it's worth the upgrade is moot:

It would appear that if your interest is NOT fast action of some kind, there's simply no reason not to go mirrorless. (Unless battery life/two slots is critical.)

If it is fast action, and you need a FF right now then go with the current 5 or 1. If you can wait, wait and see what comes out in R-land.
I think another possible reason to not go mirrorless would be if you just don't enjoy using any of the ones available at the moment, for example because you don't want an EVF, or you don't like the ergonomics. It seems to me there are a lots of cameras out there - DSLR and mirrorless - which are good enough to get the job done - or at least most jobs one - if you know what you are doing wtih them, so which camera you simply enjoy using more could reasonably end up being the decisive factor.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,250
281
Davidson, NC
I realize that in part my OVF preference comes from the aesthetic experience of actually looking through the lens. I have enjoyed that ever since I got my first SLR c. 1969, especially with fast lenses.

I am getting used to using the EVF on my new G5X II as I travel. It helps a lot in bright sunlight.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unfocused

Joules

EOS RP
Jul 16, 2017
317
236
Hamburg, Germany
The R system is a new system. Yes, it is fully backwards compatible with the EF System, but it is a new system. Cameras like the R and RP are clearly the first of their kind, using variations of existing sensors and having so much room for improvement that Canon could release 4 updates in just about a year for the R alone.

If they would just stop releasing EF bodies, I think the reaction from many people would be negative. They might not want to give R a shot if they are being forced to do so. Or they might simply not have an equivalent R option available to them yet and therefore look to other manufacturers.

I personally feel like this is not about releasing a 5D V as upgrade to the 5D IV, but as a supplement to the higher end R bodies coming to let people know that they aren't forced to give those a shot.

I'm not buying a 90D, but if they had just put out a M6 II that would have felt odd. As in, sure, it looks truly interesting, but it doesn't quite match the X0D line, so is telling Canon me that I have to switch systems to upgrade anyway? Why would I not look at Sony in that case?...

The 7D II guys aren't happy from what you can read around here. If Canon would pull that same move on the 5D line, it may not be that smart.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger