Canon EOS R5 down to $3399 (Reg $3899)

No price changes in Germany lately.

We saw a drop in March
for the body from 4,099 € to 3,899 € and
for the kit with the RF24-105/4L from 5,799 € down to 5,299 €.
All incl. VAT.

Maybe we'll get something with slight delay here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
It's pretty crazy to think that the R5 is the oldest camera in my fleet now. I still remember taking delivery of it just before I left for a race in Michigan. The first day on track was just testing so I used the new mirrorless camera in place of my 1DXII and knew I was holding the future of photography. I came back from that trip and sold my 1DXII and EOS R to buy an R6 and went full speed ahead into mirrorless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
No price changes in Germany lately.

We saw a drop in March
for the body from 4,099 € to 3,899 € and
for the kit with the RF24-105/4L from 5,799 € down to 5,299 €.
All incl. VAT.

Maybe we'll get something with slight delay here.
There will certainly be a "Summer Promotion" within the next few weeks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
It's pretty crazy to think that the R5 is the oldest camera in my fleet now. I still remember taking delivery of it just before I left for a race in Michigan. The first day on track was just testing so I used the new mirrorless camera in place of my 1DXII and knew I was holding the future of photography. I came back from that trip and sold my 1DXII and EOS R to buy an R6 and went full speed ahead into mirrorless.

Question: Why get the R6 if you already had the R5? I love my R5 and can't imagine what advantage the R6 would have over it
 
Upvote 0
"An executive at Canon recently stated that Canon isn't working on an EOS R5 Mark II, which is obviously not 100% accurate"

So, either the Canon exec is lying, or the R5 replacement won't be called "R5 Mkii".

If the latter is the case, it will likely be a major new product, rather than the "incremental evolution" that I was expecting.
 
Upvote 0
Question: Why get the R6 if you already had the R5? I love my R5 and can't imagine what advantage the R6 would have over it.
Lower resolution allows for faster work flow, cheaper media, cheaper computers, no need for special card readers or expensive cards. R5 files take two a half times longer to process on the same computer.
Drawing Full size previews, active tasks and export are much smoother with R6 files.
In this case, lower res in better. I'd actually prefer the R6 sensor in a R5 body. I picked R6 for these reasons. No need for more than 20mp in my line of work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
Upvote 0
Lower resolution allows for faster work flow, cheaper media, cheaper computers, no need for special card readers or expensive cards. R5 files take two a half times longer to process on the same computer.
Drawing Full size previews, active tasks and export are much smoother with R6 files.
In this case, lower res in better. I'd actually prefer the R6 sensor in a R5 body. I picked R6 for these reasons. No need for more than 20mp in my line of work.
Same for me. At the time of release, the body was $1300 more, and CFe cards were ridiculously expensive. I couldn't think of a single reason to spend up that high for the MP I didn't need. I shoot mainly youth sports now. R6 is plenty enough for that. Was never limited by my 5D3 before, and the R6 is basically the same res but provides cleaner images and better low light, and much faster.

I do think of an R5 as a second camera now that used prices are under $3k. Would be nice for higher res photos hiking etc, but that's a once per year or less trip for me. I may do it someday. Or if the R5II is stacked and not as expensive as an R3 maybe then. But R6 and R6II are really amazing cameras for most uses.

-Brian
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
Same for me. At the time of release, the body was $1300 more, and CFe cards were ridiculously expensive. I couldn't think of a single reason to spend up that high for the MP I didn't need. I shoot mainly youth sports now. R6 is plenty enough for that. Was never limited by my 5D3 before, and the R6 is basically the same res but provides cleaner images and better low light, and much faster.
I'm not opposed to having more MP, but it's not a major decision driver for me. I prefer integrated grip bodies for ergonomics, which I why the 1D X remained my primary camera until the R3 came out, even though I had the EOS R. With current Canon bodies, AF performance is no longer a big differentiator (yes, the R3 has a slight edge over the others for fast action but the differential is nowhere near what it was a few years ago). I'm quite happy with the 24 MP sensors in my R3 and R8.
 
Upvote 0
Kind of a weird statement to make in saying that they're not working on a replacement. I mean, if they actually said that, I'd have to assume that their intent with the comment was to keep sales moving on the current R5 and prevent being left with unsold inventory, which may align with some of the current sales on the R5. If Canon was truly not working on an R5 replacement after 3 years, I'd see that as a worrisome revelation. I have to assume that they don't complete the design/manufacture/release process in a short period, and if they hadn't started yet, then who knows when a new body would be released. I half expected them to release an R5ii sooner rather than later to give it the updated hot shoe if nothing else.
 
Upvote 0
I'm not opposed to having more MP, but it's not a major decision driver for me. I prefer integrated grip bodies for ergonomics, which I why the 1D X remained my primary camera until the R3 came out, even though I had the EOS R. With current Canon bodies, AF performance is no longer a big differentiator (yes, the R3 has a slight edge over the others for fast action but the differential is nowhere near what it was a few years ago). I'm quite happy with the 24 MP sensors in my R3 and R8.
I crept up the ladder to 50MP when I got my 5DSR, but found the images too noisy at ISO 1600, the burst speed was very slow, and storage and processing times were an issue. Later I dropped down to the 30MP of the 5DMkiv which produced nicer images. At the time I considered 30MP to be the "sweet spot".

Then I jumped on the MILC bandwagon. I decided to get the R5, which produces nicer images and allows for heavier cropping, which I need for wildlife as I can't afford (or deal with the weight) of big white primes. Noise isn't a problem even at ISO 3200 or 6400, thanks to Topaz. Storage isn't a problem either, as I constantly revisit and cull older shots, which helps to keep storage my needs lowish. It also reminds me of how poor some of my early shots were, thereby encouraging me to reach a higher standard overall.

I don't really feel a need for more than the 45MP of the R5, but having got used to it, I wouldn't want to drop down to 30 or 24MP again, although I completely understand the reasons why other folk find it adequate. I can't think of any reason why I'd pay $5K or more for a "R5s" or "R5ii", let alone an "R1". The R5 ain't perfect, but it would take one hell of a camera to get me to upgrade.
 
Upvote 0
Lower resolution allows for faster work flow, cheaper media, cheaper computers, no need for special card readers or expensive cards. R5 files take two a half times longer to process on the same computer.
Drawing Full size previews, active tasks and export are much smoother with R6 files.
In this case, lower res in better. I'd actually prefer the R6 sensor in a R5 body. I picked R6 for these reasons. No need for more than 20mp in my line of work.
If you don’t need more than 20 Mpx in your line of work that’s fine - get yourself a 20 Mpx camera. Many of do benefit from more Mpx so don’t deny us what we want.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0