Full-resolution sample images from the EOS R5, EOS R6, and the new lenses

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
793
803
Scotland
I know most of you guys are all Canon and we’re all Canon fans here. But I still have to ask for someone able to understand the samples, is the R5 markably better than the Nikon d850 at ISO 3200 and 6400?


There is this little niggle in my head saying buy the 500mm prime and ride it out till everyone is on mark 2/3 mirrorless bodies. And the mirrorless lenses I actually want are out and not the one that’ll feel like a stopgap till primes (100-500). Crickey I still want to be stupid and buy the 200-400 and 1dx for my 35 even if I am now being encouraged to buy a house(mother in law is paying deposit).

I just want “a” long prime or similar IQ and ideally mirrorless. Or wait it out five years with that 500 and buy the big white on my 40th.
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,081
1,428
Interestingly, the overexposed crops tend to shift color. I couldn't care less, but still something to note.
Why wouldn't they? How could one compensate for the information loss in a blown out color channel?
 

melgross

EOS RP
Nov 2, 2016
719
478
I really don’t like the lack of high ISO R5 images in this batch myself. Really looking forward to real reviews. Either way I’m very excited to purchase this camera early next year when the prices come down.
If it’s as popular early next year as it seems to be, you won’t see a price drop until the end of next year, maybe later. I seem to remember the prices of the 5D series only dropping two years after the introduction, by more than maybe $100, or so, which is negligibl.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chasingrealness

Starting out EOS R

EOS R5 - RF24-105mm F4L, RF70-200mm f2.8L
Feb 13, 2020
294
315
Well, I'm not sure what images tell me, they are not that impressive but viewed on a small screen, they never will be.

I'm still waiting for some in depth reviews as the only one's online so far are the R6 DP review and Tony Northrop who concentrated on the video performance and getting them to overheat. It wasn't a negative review but he was filming in 90degrees outside and in a non ventilated basement that he admitted gets very warm. I suppose with all the hype around that aspect he's bound to focus on this but a shame he didn't spend more time and do a review of stills as well. He was very complimentary about the animal AF and even said it was better than Sony. That's a turn up for the books lol.

I've just had an e-mail from my retailer to say they will have my R5 on Thursday ready to deliver on the 30th. Guess I'll find out what it's like for myself. :D
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
1,974
729
Davidson, NC
I think the point was that some people may have underestimated how much the focal length matters. At 600mm or 800mm you're going to get blurred backgrounds no matter what. A 800mm f/2.8 would be a sight to behold, btw ;)
The lens would be about a foot in diameter. Once your team of sherpas mounted it on a stand, you would have 9/16" depth of field to play with for a subject 30 feet away. Eye autofocus would be really important.
 

BeenThere

EOS R
CR Pro
Sep 4, 2012
1,238
663
Eastern Shore
Well, I'm not sure what images tell me, they are not that impressive but viewed on a small screen, they never will be.

I'm still waiting for some in depth reviews as the only one's online so far are the R6 DP review and Tony Northrop who concentrated on the video performance and getting them to overheat. It wasn't a negative review but he was filming in 90degrees outside and in a non ventilated basement that he admitted gets very warm. I suppose with all the hype around that aspect he's bound to focus on this but a shame he didn't spend more time and do a review of stills as well. He was very complimentary about the animal AF and even said it was better than Sony. That's a turn up for the books lol.

I've just had an e-mail from my retailer to say they will have my R5 on Thursday ready to deliver on the 30th. Guess I'll find out what it's like for myself. :D
Your retailer may just be trying to keep you from jumping ship to another retailer with better promises. Color me cynical.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
1,974
729
Davidson, NC
Why wouldn't they? How could one compensate for the information loss in a blown out color channel?
The Highlight slider in Lightroom and ACR uses information from the other two channels to try highlight recovery. Judicious use of SpitToning can even out highlight color casts.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,006
9,470
I know most of you guys are all Canon and we’re all Canon fans here. But I still have to ask for someone able to understand the samples, is the R5 markably better than the Nikon d850 at ISO 3200 and 6400?


There is this little niggle in my head saying buy the 500mm prime and ride it out till everyone is on mark 2/3 mirrorless bodies. And the mirrorless lenses I actually want are out and not the one that’ll feel like a stopgap till primes (100-500). Crickey I still want to be stupid and buy the 200-400 and 1dx for my 35 even if I am now being encouraged to buy a house(mother in law is paying deposit).

I just want “a” long prime or similar IQ and ideally mirrorless. Or wait it out five years with that 500 and buy the big white on my 40th.
A few of us here are shooting with the D850 and 500PF as well as with Canon. I'll eat my hat if the EOS R5 with an AA filter outresolves the the D850. I find for myself and there are measurements made to show it, the D850 outresolves the 5DSR (and I am a public relations rep for the 5DSR). The D850 is good enough at iso 3200 and 6400.
 

Starting out EOS R

EOS R5 - RF24-105mm F4L, RF70-200mm f2.8L
Feb 13, 2020
294
315
Your retailer may just be trying to keep you from jumping ship to another retailer with better promises. Color me cynical.
You could be right but in this case, I don't think so as they have been really honest about other orders I have made and I know I was 5th in the list so fingers crossed, I can get my sticky little fingers on it in about a week. :D
 

Kit.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Apr 25, 2011
2,081
1,428
The Highlight slider in Lightroom and ACR uses information from the other two channels to try highlight recovery. Judicious use of SpitToning can even out highlight color casts.
I doubt the assumption it uses hold true for the image of uniform square color patches.

Unless it knows that particular image, that is. Which by now cannot be ruled out.
 

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,057
1,644
Kentucky, USA
I've seen the photos and some downloads of them, but don't feel that they tell enough about what the lenses really can do to be truly useful.

I'm getting the RF 15-35 f2.8 for wide angle, and the RF 70-200 f2.8 and RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 for portrait & telephoto. It's hard to decide about the mid-range zooms or primes and I wanted to ask for advice on which 1 (or 2) of these do you think would be best to fill the mid-range with the R5?
RF 24-105 f4
RF 24-70 f2.8
RF 28-70 f2
RF 50 f1.2

I know it's hard for anyone to know what's best for me, but I'd appreciate your suggestions on these lenses anyway, as it would help me decide.
 
Last edited:

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
793
803
Scotland
A few of us here are shooting with the D850 and 500PF as well as with Canon. I'll eat my hat if the EOS R5 with an AA filter outresolves the the D850. I find for myself and there are measurements made to show it, the D850 outresolves the 5DSR (and I am a public relations rep for the 5DSR). The D850 is good enough at iso 3200 and 6400.

Thanks for the response, it is good to hear from some one I have a growing trust of. I am really thinking of waiting out mirrorless on the wildlife side for the mark 2 cameras and a lens I actually want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BeenThere
Feb 15, 2020
504
347
I've seen the photos and some downloads of them, but don't feel that they tell enough about what the lenses really can do to be truly useful.

I'm getting the RF 15-35 f2.8 for wide angle, and the RF 70-200 f2.8 and RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 for portrait & telephoto. It's hard to decide about the mid-range zooms or primes and I wanted to ask for advice on which 1 (or 2) of these do you think would be best to fill the mid-range with the R5?
RF 24-105 f4
RF 24-70 f2.8
RF 28-70 f2
RF 50 f1.2

I know it's hard for anyone to know what's best for me, but I'd appreciate your suggestions on these lenses anyway, as it would help me decide.
Personally, I'm not a fan of overlapping focal lengths in my lens collection so I would go for the RF 50mm 1.2L. It's quite nice to have a faster prime in the collection and the RF 50mm is the best 50mm Canon has ever made IMO
 
  • Like
Reactions: usern4cr

Starting out EOS R

EOS R5 - RF24-105mm F4L, RF70-200mm f2.8L
Feb 13, 2020
294
315
Personally, I'm not a fan of overlapping focal lengths in my lens collection so I would go for the RF 50mm 1.2L. It's quite nice to have a faster prime in the collection and the RF 50mm is the best 50mm Canon has ever made IMO
I've seen the photos and some downloads of them, but don't feel that they tell enough about what the lenses really can do to be truly useful.

I'm getting the RF 15-35 f2.8 for wide angle, and the RF 70-200 f2.8 and RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 for portrait & telephoto. It's hard to decide about the mid-range zooms or primes and I wanted to ask for advice on which 1 (or 2) of these do you think would be best to fill the mid-range with the R5?
RF 24-105 f4
RF 24-70 f2.8
RF 28-70 f2
RF 50 f1.2

I know it's hard for anyone to know what's best for me, but I'd appreciate your suggestions on these lenses anyway, as it would help me decide.
I have been wondering the very same thing. I have the RF 24-105MM F4 that was part of the kit when I purchased the R and I found it to be great as a general walk around lens. I'm not a pro but as I started to be more adventurous with the types of images I take, I found I wanted more focal length so purchased the 70-200mm F2.8 and since then it's the only lens I've used, you won't be disappointed. Maybe I haven't used the 24-105mm as I'm still in the honeymoon period for the 70-200mm.

I did start to wonder if one of the 24/28-70mm lenses would be a better option than the 24-105mm so there is no overlap and I would then have faster lenses for most situations but I've decided to keep the 24-105mm as I don't do portraits or low light photography so whilst the 24/28-70mm F2.2.8 lenses look amazing, boy are they expensive and they are heavy as well. The 24-105mm along with the 70-200mm will do just fine for the city breaks and holidays we do.

Not much help I'm afraid. I suppose if you do low light or portrait, then I would go for either the 24-70 or 28-70 over the 24-105. As Chris said, the 50mm is also a great option and from seeing numerous You tube photography videos, most of them use it a lot for doing street photography.

If I had the money, I'd have all of them except maybe only one out of the 24-70 & 28-70.

Confused, I am lol :ROFLMAO:
 

tron

EOS R5
CR Pro
Nov 8, 2011
4,862
1,168
I've seen the photos and some downloads of them, but don't feel that they tell enough about what the lenses really can do to be truly useful.

I'm getting the RF 15-35 f2.8 for wide angle, and the RF 70-200 f2.8 and RF 100-500 f4.5-7.1 for portrait & telephoto. It's hard to decide about the mid-range zooms or primes and I wanted to ask for advice on which 1 (or 2) of these do you think would be best to fill the mid-range with the R5?
RF 24-105 f4
RF 24-70 f2.8
RF 28-70 f2
RF 50 f1.2

I know it's hard for anyone to know what's best for me, but I'd appreciate your suggestions on these lenses anyway, as it would help me decide.
Unless you plan of getting 2 R5 cameras I would suggest a mid range zoom like 24-70 2.8 or 24-105 4 to avoid changing lenses all the time (between 15-35 and 70-200).
 

usern4cr

R5
CR Pro
Sep 2, 2018
1,057
1,644
Kentucky, USA
Unless you plan of getting 2 R5 cameras I would suggest a mid range zoom like 24-70 2.8 or 24-105 4 to avoid changing lenses all the time (between 15-35 and 70-200).
Thanks Chris, StartingOut and Tron for your suggestions. Initially, I will just have 1 R5 body with my lenses. But as soon as Canon comes out with their 85?MPixel body I will get one of those as a 2nd body. So long term I plan to have 2 (and only 2) bodies. But it may be a year or so before the 85?MP body comes out, so that's why I feel such pressure to get the 24-105 f4 now as a single walk around lens with good enough IQ and reach for the times I don't want to carry another lens or swap them so often. But I hate feeling pressure to get a lens with lesser IQ than the other options. In the times I could use just 1 lens, the 24-70 f2.8 is close in weight & size but I'd miss the extra 105mm reach. The 28-70 f2 might be too heavy or "scary to others" to use as the only walk around lens, and if I did use it as the only lens then I'd miss the 24mm and 105mm reach.

In a year or so after I can get the 85?MP 2nd body it'd be different, as I wouldn't feel the need for the 24-105 since the 2nd body could be the 70-200 or 100-500.

But since I'm looking at a year probably with 1 body, I guess it's prudent to get the 24-105 f4 for the times (which are frequent) when I prefer to walk around with a single body & lens. Whether I get other primes (50, 85 etc) could be just in addition to it. :sneaky:
 

highdesertmesa

R5 | 50R | Q | M
CR Pro
Apr 17, 2017
348
485
www.instagram.com
I know most of you guys are all Canon and we’re all Canon fans here. But I still have to ask for someone able to understand the samples, is the R5 markably better than the Nikon d850 at ISO 3200 and 6400?


There is this little niggle in my head saying buy the 500mm prime and ride it out till everyone is on mark 2/3 mirrorless bodies. And the mirrorless lenses I actually want are out and not the one that’ll feel like a stopgap till primes (100-500). Crickey I still want to be stupid and buy the 200-400 and 1dx for my 35 even if I am now being encouraged to buy a house(mother in law is paying deposit).

I just want “a” long prime or similar IQ and ideally mirrorless. Or wait it out five years with that 500 and buy the big white on my 40th.

Resolution & ISO between D850 and R5 would seem to be less of a motivation to switch than the animal/people eye-AF and IBIS.

IMO, the 100-500 IQ and AF ability in samples/reviews makes it look like less of a stopgap to the primes and more like a permanent, lightweight alternative, provided you're not addicted to wide-aperture bokeh of something like the EF 500 f/4.
 

Codebunny

Elil
Sep 5, 2018
793
803
Scotland
Resolution & ISO between D850 and R5 would seem to be less of a motivation to switch than the animal/people eye-AF and IBIS.

IMO, the 100-500 IQ and AF ability in samples/reviews makes it look like less of a stopgap to the primes and more like a permanent, lightweight alternative, provided you're not addicted to wide-aperture bokeh of something like the EF 500 f/4.

Oh it won’t necessarily be for switching. It’ll be for that one lens. Animal Eye AF is tempting but I have lived with the one AF point of the 5dII and it still had the animal in focus. IBIS is good but that lens has 5 stops.

But on to the main thing with the 100-500. It is really tempting but it will have to prove itself on quality and personally it isn’t whispering to me like a big prime or that big prime mini is. There is still about six months before I buy. So I’ll see if a 500mm f/4 RF gets any traction now that the stable of standard lenses is filled up. Or maybe even a new 300 f2.8, I love my current 300 2.8 but it weights as much as the 600 and is held together with hope and luck after all these decades.
 
  • Like
Reactions: highdesertmesa
<-- start Taboola -->