Here is the Canon EOS R5 and Canon EOS R6, along with the announcement date

[The Fat Fish]

The 5D Mark IV is currently going for less than $2K at authorized U.S. dealers. Isn't that about the price range of the 6D when it was introduced?

Yes but the 5DIV isn't the most modern of cameras. On release it was reliable but dated. For $2k the resolution and dynamic range are fair but the video features are incredibly poor in comparison to the competition and it lacks great features like IBIS.

 

[BillB]

'Official' base ISO for both cameras is 100. For some reason, DxO thinks the real base ISO in 1DxIII is higher.

What DxO thinks is a mystery.

 

[Viggo]

What DxO thinks is a mystery.

I thought they actually measured it?

 

[venusFivePhotoStudio]

Yes but the 5DIV isn't the most modern of cameras. On release it was reliable but dated. For $2k the resolution and dynamic range are fair but the video features are incredibly poor in comparison to the competition and it lacks great features like IBIS.

Second hand 5DIV are around 1000eur

 

[dichterDichter]

Some years ago i switched to sony (a7II). some days ago, i started to look for a 70-200 and ended here, looking forward to maybe go back to canon with a R6 + 70-200 f2.8 or f4. It clearly depends on canon to not screw this completely for example with a very high pricetag....

 

[Michael Clark]

Yes but the 5DIV isn't the most modern of cameras. On release it was reliable but dated. For $2k the resolution and dynamic range are fair but the video features are incredibly poor in comparison to the competition and it lacks great features like IBIS.

I must have missed where the 6D (or 6D Mark II) had those features...

The 5D Mark IV is a significant upgrade from the 6D that is currently about the same price as the 6D was introduced at.

 

[Quarkcharmed]

Folks who have gone from the 1D X Mark II to the 1D X Mark III mostly say that the shadows can be pushed a lot better with the III than the II. Maybe it's new camera confirmation bias, or maybe the III is metering/exposing more to the right and risking blowing the highlights more?

The exposure doesn't matter imho as long as they push the shadows of the same brightness on the II and the III. If they push lighter shadows on the III, then it's an obvious bias, yes.

 

[The Fat Fish]

I must have missed where the 6D (or 6D Mark II) had those features...

The 5D Mark IV is a significant upgrade from the 6D that is currently about the same price as the 6D was introduced at.

Yes, in comparison to the 6D it was yes, but was it a good value at the time? Not really, no. I'm not saying it's a bad camera - it's a very good camera but I don't think the features justified the price.

 

[Michael Clark]

Yes, in comparison to the 6D it was yes, but was it a good value at the time? Not really, no. I'm not saying it's a bad camera - it's a very good camera but I don't think the features justified the price.

You said you've been waiting forever for an upgrade for the 6D. I'm merely pointing out that the 6D Mark II and 5D Mark IV are both significant upgrades to the 6D and don't cost any more than the 6D did when first rolled out. That is all.

 

[The Fat Fish]

You said you've been waiting forever for an upgrade for the 6D. I'm merely pointing out that the 6D Mark II and 5D Mark IV are both significant upgrades to the 6D and don't cost any more than the 6D did when first rolled out. That is all.

The 6DII really isn't much of an upgrade and wasn't worth the price when it was released. The 6DII is possibly the most disappointing camera Canon have ever released. The less said about it the better.

The 5DIV is a noticeable upgrade over the 6D bit it lacks features it should of had at it's price point and release date. Today it's much better value but as it's 2020, I want a 2020 camera. Excellent DR, decent resolution, IBIS and not the 5DIV's worst in class video features.

 

[Michael Clark]

The 6DII really isn't much of an upgrade and wasn't worth the price when it was released. The 6DII is possibly the most disappointing camera Canon have ever released. The less said about it the better.

So said the YouTube reviewers and Sony fanboys (or paid shills posting from impoverished countries that have never seen a single 6D Mark II within their borders) who never actually used the 6D Mark II, based on a single measurement by DxO of DR at base ISO.

The 6D Mark II had a real AF system, instead of the Rebel AF system used in the 6D. It was pretty much the equal of the 5D Mark III in every way, other than slight differences in build quality, shutter life rating, 1/4000 vs. 1/8000, and X-sync of 1/180 vs 1/200. None of those things matter one iota if you're primarily concerned with video.

Even Tony Northrup, bless his heart, who thoroughly panned it upon release eventually admitted it was the best v-logging camera for him a year or so after it was introduced.

 

[Michael Clark]

The 5DIV is a noticeable upgrade over the 6D bit it lacks features it should of had at it's price point and release date. Today it's much better value but as it's 2020, I want a 2020 camera. Excellent DR, decent resolution, IBIS and not the 5DIV's worst in class video features.

The 5D Mark IV's DR holds up against anything else on the market today unless 1/6 of a stop at base ISO is really that important to you.

I'd place 30 MP right smack-dab in the middle of "decent resolution" for stills between 20 MP on one end and 50-60 MP on the other. The files are manageable while also leaving room for sane amounts of cropping.

You might have a legitimate complaint regarding video features, but then if you're mostly concerned with video, the 5D Mark IV has way more resolution than is optimal for a 4K video camera. That's why it's cropped so severely. Get a 20MP camera that can shoot 4K at the full width of the sensor on a 1:1 pixel basis.

So that leaves IBIS. Again, if you're primarily concerned with video, aren't you using sliders, dollies, booms, etc. to mount the camera anyway?

 

[The Fat Fish]

So said the YouTube reviewers and Sony fanboys (or paid shills posting from impoverished countries that have never seen a single 6D Mark II within their borders) who never actually used the 6D Mark II, based on a single measurement by DxO of DR at base ISO.

The 6D Mark II had a real AF system, instead of the Rebel AF system used in the 6D. It was pretty much the equal of the 5D Mark III in every way, other than slight differences in build quality, shutter life rating, 1/4000 vs. 1/8000 and X-sync of 1/180 vs 1/200. None of those things matter one iota if you're primarily concerned with video.

Even Tony Northrup, bless his heart, who thoroughly panned it upon release eventually admitted it was the best v-logging camera for him a year or so after it was introduced.

I hired it for two weeks and hated it. What a complete and utterly pointless camera - sorry, I really dislike the 6DII. So disappointing.

 

[The Fat Fish]

The 5D Mark IV's DR holds up against anything else on the market today unless 1/6 of a stop at base ISO is really that important to you.

I'd place 30 MP right smack-dab in the middle of "decent resolution" for stills between 20 MP on one end and 50-60 MP on the other. The files are manageable while also leaving room for sane amounts of cropping.

You might have a legitimate complaint regarding video features, but then if you're mostly concerned with video, the 5D Mark IV has way more resolution than is optimal for a 4K video camera. That's why it's cropped so severely. Get a 20MP camera that can shoot 4K at the full width of the sensor on a 1:1 pixel basis.

So that leaves IBIS. Again, if you're primarily concerned with video, aren't you using sliders, dollies, booms, etc. to mount the camera anyway?

The resolution is good for a $2000 camera and the DR is fine also. As you say, it's the video features that aren't. Other manufacturers have managed high resolution and great quality video, I really wish Canon could. IBIS is also really useful for stills - specifically handheld with non IS lenses.

 

[Joules]

Other manufacturers have managed high resolution and great quality video, I really wish Canon could.

The Canon 90D does great quality over sampled 4K video without crop, although at 32 MP it has one of Canon's highest resolution sensors. Canon can do it. And they seem to continue doing it. The R5 will do 8K!

 

[Aussie shooter]

Yes, in comparison to the 6D it was yes, but was it a good value at the time? Not really, no. I'm not saying it's a bad camera - it's a very good camera but I don't think the features justified the price.

I would say otherwise but then again I have always rated ergonomics, reliability and access to the best range of native lenses above the cool but ultimately unnecessary features like IBIS, and extra half stop of the mythological DR. And resolution has to do with the way the camera is used. Not its price