The Canon EOS R5 Mark II coming in Q2, 2023? [CR2]

[unfocused]

For selfish financial reasons I'd rather they wait another year.

It seems unlikely that they would release this before the R1 and we haven't seen any credible rumors on the R1 yet. If this is just mainly the R3 with a higher resolution sensor and a non-gripped body I'd be underwhelmed. I'd rather they wait until the quad-pixel autofocus is ready, as in my opinion that is the upgrade that is most needed.

 

[Del Paso]

Ah, but but wait until are you taking photos and videos of rapidly moving skyscrapers! How often do you use the second slot? There will be many who do. I don't except to use the 2nd slot as an emergency back up of the first. All those cheap SD cards I have accumulated over the years can provide back up storage while travelling by copying from the 1st slot.
I remember some who would put higher octane fuel than manufacturers recommended in the vain hope they would get better performance...

Fully agree...
I too am using the second slot, all the time, but only as a backup.
But I hardly ever took a picture of a skyscraper, too fast for the EOS R's AF.
PS: I had a hard time convincing customers that there is no "better" fuel, only the adequate one. And that a beetle didn't need or benefit from premium...

 

[bellorusso]

Dual CFexpress type B card slot?
Doesn\'t sound like Canon. Why would Canon make our lives easier for absolutely no reason. Not their style.

 

[entoman]

Dual CFexpress type B card slot?
Doesn\'t sound like Canon. Why would Canon make our lives easier for absolutely no reason. Not their style.

Speak for yourself - dual CFE would make life more difficult, not easier, for me. See my post on previous page.
Why do you want/need dual CFE?

 

[Dragon]

Legit ordered a new body for fun right before this post. The R7 for it's 15 mechanical flappy bit per second to keep my mind off the R5. This sounds like an ideal upgrade to the tripod megapixel 5dsR dinosaurs I have. Sounds too good to be true..my intention was was the R7 for sports & then later the FF mirrorless upgrade. Thought it would of been the R5s or R1. 60mp is more than enough if it's like the R3's contrast characteristics and sticky autofocus

The R7 (particularly with the RF 800 f/11) is great for wildlife. The R5 is an excellent all-arounder. I have rarely found the need for a tripod with the 5DSr, but then, I mostly use it with IS lenses and particularly the Sigma 24-105 f/4. I still like the crispness of the 5DSr images, but the R5 is very close and the R7 is simply unsurpassed for reach combined with excellent AF.

 

[Dragon]

CFe has surpassed SD in terms of capacity and price and its quite sensible at this point to get rid of SD slot on this camera. This also raises questions about castrations on R6 II(no CFe slot, non BSI sensor and micro Hdmi port) and R7.

At the end of the day, it is about heat and size. CFe takes considerably more room than SD and those PCIE drivers and the internal buffering in the CFe card to keep up the high speed are both very power hungry.

 

[AlanF]

The R7 (particularly with the RF 800 f/11) is great for wildlife. The R5 is an excellent all-arounder. I have rarely found the need for a tripod with the 5DSr, but then, I mostly use it with IS lenses and particularly the Sigma 24-105 f/4. I still like the crispness of the 5DSr images, but the R5 is very close and the R7 is simply unsurpassed for reach combined with excellent AF.

I agree on the whole, but when I need AF for BIF, I grab the R5 over the R7.

 

[PaulieWalnuts]

Finally a camera with two fast memory cards. I never understood the appeal of SD cards. The argument is that you can get SD cards everywhere, but I think people, who pay that much money on a camera, will have enough memory cards anyway.

Did pixel shift really work well for any camera unless you use attach a concrete block to your camera to reduce the vibration?

BSI sensor would be a huge improvement. For still subjects that is even more important than a stacked sensor.

Will 1080p recording also be oversampled?

Some of those specs seem like wishes instead of rumors. Will Canon really give us a full size HDMI port that does not break after a few hundred plugs and unplugs? That will cost a lot of jobs in Canon repair facilities.

I have a Lumix S1R and the high-res pixel shift works really well. I use a tripod but haven't had a problem with vibration.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

If a cameras has IBIS, it should be quite difficult to achieved as the sensor is "floating" and for pixel shift the sensor has to be moved a very tiny amount.

 

[Dragon]

I agree on the whole, but when I need AF for BIF, I grab the R5 over the R7.

Yes, the larger field of view on the R5 is nice, but note that with the RF 800 f/11 (and the little 600) the AF FOV only covers a portion of the lens, which is a much bigger percentage of a crop frame than of a FF. I use the Olympus EE-1 Red dot on both cameras as a finder for long reach, so the reduced overall FOV on the R7s isn't too much of a problem and the extra pixels are nice. For fast moving birds, I would also probably reach for the R5 with the EF 100-400 (I don't have the RF 100-500) but I have a resident population of hummingbirds and max magnification is critical.

 

[Bezbozny]

ok.. not the right forum to ask this but how can the RF800 a f11 lens get so good reviews? even in broad day light it would be impossible to shot BIF and other wildlife where you need a shutter speed of 1:1000 or even 1:2000.....

 

[Dragon]

ok.. not the right forum to ask this but how can the RF800 a f11 lens get so good reviews? even in broad day light it would be impossible to shot BIF and other wildlife where you need a shutter speed of 1:1000 or even 1:2000.....

a) not all wildlife is moving at blinding speed and b) with a little help from DXO Photolab and Topaz Denoise, ISO 12800 on the R5 and ISO 6400 on the R7 are very usable. Yes, another couple of stops is desirable, but my EF 800 f/5.6 L is not very portable or hand-holdable and the 800 f/11 is a featherweight by comparison, so often (particularly with fast motion) the choice is between ISO 12800 or no shot at all, so the little lens keeps winning the day. For slower moving subjects, the 800 f/11 is very hand-holdable at 1/250 (even with the R7). Hope that helps to answer the question.

 

[AlanF]

ok.. not the right forum to ask this but how can the RF800 a f11 lens get so good reviews? even in broad day light it would be impossible to shot BIF and other wildlife where you need a shutter speed of 1:1000 or even 1:2000.....

Impossible?? Firstly, on a sunny day, 1/1000s f/11 requires an iso of only 800, and 1/2000s iso 1600, which are trivial for the R series. Secondly, you can go up to very high isos with the R3, R5, R6 and R7 with modern noise reduction software for darker scenes. Thirdly, the lens isn't targeted for BIF photography, it's primarily for static shots, especially as its field of view for AF is restricted to the centre of the viewfinder. The lens is designed to be a very lightweight and reasonably sharp very long lens.

 

[Dragon]

Impossible?? Firstly, on a sunny day, 1/1000s f/11 requires an iso of only 800, and 1/2000s iso 1600, which are trivial for the R series. Secondly, you can go up to very high isos with the R3, R5, R6 and R7 with modern noise reduction software for darker scenes. Thirdly, the lens isn't targeted for BIF photography, it's primarily for static shots, especially as its field of view for AF is restricted to the centre of the viewfinder. The lens is designed to be a very lightweight and reasonably sharp very long lens.

And (my copy at least) the 800 f/11 is better than "reasonably sharp". It doesn't quite match the EF 800 f/5.6 L, but it is darn close (maybe only the diffraction difference). The big deal is the portability, so you have the lens with you and can easily handhold it to get the shot when the opportunity presents. Just a new take on the old saying "the best camera for the shot is the one you have with you". Missed BIF shots are right in there with fish stories.

 

[AlanF]

Yes, the larger field of view on the R5 is nice, but note that with the RF 800 f/11 (and the little 600) the AF FOV only covers a portion of the lens, which is a much bigger percentage of a crop frame than of a FF. I use the Olympus EE-1 Red dot on both cameras as a finder for long reach, so the reduced overall FOV on the R7s isn't too much of a problem and the extra pixels are nice. For fast moving birds, I would also probably reach for the R5 with the EF 100-400 (I don't have the RF 100-500) but I have a resident population of hummingbirds and max magnification is critical.

It's not the field of view, it's that the AF of the R5 latches on quicker and more accurately for BIF. I presume you shoot hummingbirds when they are hovering, which is fine for the R7 (I do the same for hovering dragonflies). I find the R5 AF much better for birds rapidly flying and get much better keeper rates. I also use the RF 100-500 or RF 100-400, and not my 800/11 for BIF as noted in our replies to the usefulness of the 800/11.

 

[AlanF]

And (my copy at least) the 800 f/11 is better than "reasonably sharp". It doesn't quite match the EF 800 f/5.6 L, but it is darn close (maybe only the diffraction difference). The big deal is the portability, so you have the lens with you and can easily handhold it to get the shot when the opportunity presents. Just a new take on the old saying "the best camera for the shot is the one you have with you". Missed BIF shots are right in there with fish stories.

Don't get me wrong, I think the lens is sharp - but it's not going to match the 600/4 or 400/2.8. Here are some examples where I was able to push very happily the 800/11 on the R7 to its limits.

Ye Bee-eaters of Merrie England

Now, for those who thought it was a typo and were hoping to see photos of those guardians of the Tower of London, I am afraid you will be disappointed. The European Bee-eater is an extremely rare visitor to the UK but this summer a flock of 8 has taken up residence in Norfolk and are breeding in...

www.canonrumors.com

 

[Jethro]

And again Canon \'forgets\' to incorporate GPS!
And as Yoms points out: if there would be battery drain, I can manage that as for my 5DMkIV I have 4 spare batteries. That\'s good for me and good for the Canon revenues......

You realise these are only rumoured and partial specs?

 

[AlanF]

And (my copy at least) the 800 f/11 is better than "reasonably sharp". It doesn't quite match the EF 800 f/5.6 L, but it is darn close (maybe only the diffraction difference). The big deal is the portability, so you have the lens with you and can easily handhold it to get the shot when the opportunity presents. Just a new take on the old saying "the best camera for the shot is the one you have with you". Missed BIF shots are right in there with fish stories.

I have been musing what I would do if the MkII did come out. Would I trade in the R5 or the R7 for it? Not an easy decision (apart from price). Maybe it would be the R5 for the reason that my wife uses the R7 when I am using the R5 and she is not tech savvy but can handle the mechanical mode dial which I preset for her.

 

[davidhfe]

This would be an instant preorder for me, which usually means it's the figment of somebody's imagination. Oh, to not have to mess around with two types of cards anymore...

 

[mpmark]

That is sheer nonsense: photocells, whatever their size, are designed to being as close together on the sensor so there are minimal gaps between them otherwise light is lost. Spacing cells further apart in the same area would lower light gathering power, make poorer iso response and lower DR.

I’m not going to go back and forth with a silly argument, believe what you want, frankly I don’t care if you understand it or not.