The Canon EOS R5 Mark II is closer to a reality than Canon’s claims

[dave7]

The R5 body size, shape and ergonomics are horrible imo. I love what Nikon did with the Z8 (and previously Panasonic with the S1 series) in that regards.

I used to have a 5D Mark III and I loved it, it felt just right as regards those criteria.

Adding a built-in GPS would be really nice. For those concerning about battery life, simply disable the feature or add a spare battery in your bag. Problem solved. But at least, those who need it can use it.

Purely photographic specs (MP count, AF, DR, etc.) are absolutely fine as they are. What this camera needs is to improve all the other aspects (some of them mentioned above) to make it really attractive. To me, the R5 is just simply not a camera that makes me want to grab it and start shooting when I see it. The spirit of the 5D series is not there... yet?

Again, just my opinion as a 5D shooter.

Built in GPS would be great. There really is no excuse for a $3,000+ camera to lack it. I'd like a simply 'turn on GPS for 10 minutes' feature. You arrive someplace new and can turn it on and it would turn back off to save battery.

 

[dave7]

According to B&H. The R1 will be a big hit in 2025 for pro/consumers in "full" production numbers. 2024 will see "some" targeted distribution to professionals through CPS. Make nice with CPS

Why the long rollout? I assume this will have to be a massive upgrade given the development time.

 

[dave7]

It should at least match the R6 II in features and obviously exceed it in more than just megapixels.

I'm hoping for much better autofocus, internal GPS, dual CFExpress cards, and better low light performance. 45 megapixels is fine I think for me at least.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Why the long rollout?

That's based on a statement from an unreliable source claiming to quote a Canon-authorized vendor.

 

[neuroanatomist]

And for the 30sek limit you don't need another menu, just bring 60sek, 120sek, 240sek, ... (or 1/3 steps) and so on. For a user, who doesn't "wheel" to 30sek there is no burden, he won't notice.

In Fv mode, the Auto setting for shutter speed is the click past the 30 s setting. So anyone using Fv would potentially be burdened by more spinning of the main dial.

 

[The Professor]

That's right. I shoot sports and birds and experienced rolling shutter effect sometimes so I hope a stacked sensor will improve that.
R3 is great for sports but I prefer a smaller body with a higher MP for cropping when shooting birds.
Goodies like eye focus is awesome on theory but still needs more time to mature.

I hear many say that 45MP is enough..but being a bird photographer (nature as well).. croping with the R5 has been a dream .. but for my work there can NEVER be enough MP , as long as there are not some unforeseen issues .. FPS is also important ..so Ok 100MP and 30FPS would be a new dream come true ..Im sure there would be some tech stuff I don't know about but just adding my two cents. For my ..lets call it" regular" imaging .. sure 45 is way good I guess .. but I had a 5Dsr and got use to large MP ... kind of once you go BIG MP you can't go back . lastly all the other features you guys ask for are fine but I thought this camera was a kind of Bird Photographer camera ...a dream ..so a markII I would think would have to be more MP and fast as can be ...Guess the R3 is for all other types of imaging( who knows what "tricks Canon has for the Mythical R1) ...P.S. forgot Focusing ... as I love the R5 .guess the R6 II and R3 has some cool focus stuff.. so let me add a super "fast and accurate" system for eye and animal focus etc ....ok Im new so Ill stop and move on ..thanks for you read . I can dream ...can't I ..LOL

 

[scyrene]

kind of once you go BIG MP you can't go back .

I totally understand the desire for more cropping for birds in particular but my experience was the opposite - I went from 22MP (5D3) to 50MP (5Ds) and then back down to 20MP (R6) and while I would sometimes like a bit more, in most circumstances it's fine (though I've pushed the focal lengths back up, shooting at 1120mm and even 1600mm now). Each to their own, and it's complicated by numerous optical, software/postprocessing and subject matter issues, but I'm pretty ambivalent about ever higher resolution sensors even speaking as a bird photographer above all else.

 

[PinholeR5]

I've had the exact opposite experience with Eye-Control AF. For me, it's simply been incredible and I'd really question purchasing another camera without it. I've used it for events, portraiture, and wildlife and have nothing but praise. I've even called CPS to express my enthusiasm for it.

While shooting events, for example, being able to accurately switch focus from one person to the next - practically on the fly - is just amazing and an enormous time saver; I have found that I can capture fleeting moments that would otherwise be missed if using my R5 simply because there is no way I could manually toggle between subjects as quickly.

For portraiture with multiple people, Eye-Control allows me to use a fast prime wide open and quickly focus between my two subjects almost instantly; this minimizes the subjects' movements, and I can then stack the images in Photoshop to create an in-focus image of both people on slightly different focal planes that still looks natural.

Regarding wildlife, I primarily photograph birds. While I will admit Eye-Control isn't particularly helpful when birds are in-flight (although I have been able to use it to lock on to larger in-flight birds), it's very handy when there are multiple birds in the scene and I need to focus quickly on the one that begins to take off or does something interesting. Also, I've found Eye-Control AF useful when focusing through tall grass or branches.

I understand some people have issues with Eye-Control AF. Fortunately, I'm not one of them. Hopefully with time Canon will improve the technology so that less people have issues. With that said, I always wonder if the people with issues have spent enough time really dialling it in through calibration. I've calibrated mine in a wide variety of different lighting conditions, and often find I rarely need to recalibrate it at this point.

It is good to hear! I haven't found many people who have had luck with the the Eye-Control AF. I spent the most time trying to use it with youth soccer. I would go through calibration before every single match to make sure I had it tuned to the exact lighting conditions for that day. However, I found it wasn't accurate enough for me. I don't use glasses so that isn't the issue.

I have found that using a single center focus point without tracking was more reliable. This is one of the three AF buttons I have set. I also have the center area, and whole area, both with tracking and subject/eye detection. When I don't have my desired subject in focus, I can simply use the single point (moving the camera, not the point) to target the player then switch the button to center area (or whole area) and it will lock on the desired player and I can recompose as needed. Or, sometimes, I'll just take the shot off of the center point and crop for composition later if needed, but usually I'll have plenty of time to recompose.

I haven't tried it nearly as much for wildlife. I do get great results with my three AF button settings, so I rarely feel the need. Also, when I do get some trouble the single spot AF button is the best solution. In those situations, Eye-Control AF struggles as well. I also have a tendency to be "scanning the scene" all the time and that messes up the Eye-Control AF.

At any rate, hearing about your success has inspired me to give it another go.

 

[Kit.]

The R5 has best in class dynamic range.

Not for video, obviously.

 

[Jethro]

It is good to hear! I haven't found many people who have had luck with the the Eye-Control AF. I spent the most time trying to use it with youth soccer. I would go through calibration before every single match to make sure I had it tuned to the exact lighting conditions for that day. However, I found it wasn't accurate enough for me. I don't use glasses so that isn't the issue.

I have found that using a single center focus point without tracking was more reliable. This is one of the there AF buttons I have set. I also have the center area, and whole area, both with tracking and subject/eye detection. When I don't have my desired subject in focus, I can simply use the single point (moving the camera, not the point) to target the player then switch the button to center area (or whole area) and it will lock on the desired player and I can recompose as needed. Or, sometimes, I'll just take the shot off of the center point and crop for composition later if needed, but usually I'll have plenty of time to recompose.

I haven't tried it nearly as much for wildlife. I do get great results with my three AF button settings, so I rarely feel the need. Also, when I do get some trouble the single spot AF button is the best solution. In those situations, Eye-Control AF struggles as well. I also have a tendency to be "scanning the scene" all the time and that messes up the Eye-Control AF.

At any rate, hearing about your success has inspired me to give it another go.

They need to share some eye-control tech with Apple ...

 

[Ian K]

The obvious thing that the R5 Mark II would change is the hot shoe. The new style one would require a replacement for the GP-E2 or as others have said built in GPS. One thing I would love is the ability to turn the camera off. No really turn the camera off, not just the sleep it has now, especially if the GPS is built in.

 

[Michael Clark]

The R5 is probably all the camera i will ever need.

"640K ought to be enough for anybody."

 

[Michael Clark]

I have always wanted a 1, and may be able to get in to a position to buy one by next year (have been saving for a long time), but I think it may cost $10k USD, at which point I'd rather have the 100-300 lens.

O former Padawan, today a Master you have become.

 

[Michael Clark]

I don't think many find it a credible argument that the 1dx III is a superior camera to the R3 but for few relatively obscure specs, yet Canon is careful to avoid referring to the R3 as their "flagship." I believe this has more to do with Canon's assessment that pro EF users have a certain fragility to them and may react poorly to having their status as flagship-slingers taken away from them.

Thus, I don't think there's really any spec or feature that Canon is waiting for before they feel comfortable calling an R-mount camera the flagship.

I agree with you that high resolution is unlikely to be the R1 strong suit relative to the R3, but I don't think they're pulling a "no wine before it's time" schtick here. Their naming a flagship is going to have everything to do with product line positioning and marketing and nothing to do with any minimum standard or set of functions.

The headline here is that Canon doesn't have an R1. Anything R3 or better would be hands-down the current Canon flagship, whether the company chooses to use the term. (Incidentally, I'd argue that the R5 beats the 1dx III for that title, but I'm one of those many people who needs the higher resolution.)

It's not about user fragility. It's about utter reliability. That's the one thing Canon requires in order to label a camera their "flagship".

Canon has more than once in the past given new technologies/features to slightly lower level bodies until they've worked out the kinks. Only then have they given that feature to the next 1-Series body. Dual-pixel AF in LV/video mode, for instance. The 70D (2013) and then 7D Mark II (2014) both had it before the 1D X Mark II (2016) got it. Flicker reduction (stills) was introduced with the 7D Mark II in 2014 before the 1D X Mark II had it in 2016.

 

[Michael Clark]

R5 II without a stacked sensor is dead on arrival for us. We will soon add R6 II as a backup to our R5, which, is quaite good for us. Not even doing a video. So - a status quo upgrade to R5 (together with rumoured upcoming firmware improvements) really mean very low interest to sell our R5 and upgrade to R5 II. Really, as wedding photogs, we don't need better dispaly / ovf, second xfexpress, or crazy high frames per second, as we don't spray & prey. As a technology geek I am interested in a real / core technology (sensor, AF) advancements only.

The 5-Series has made more sense than the 1-Series as a wedding camera since 2012 (5D mark III vs. 1D X), and more so since 2016 (5D Mark IV vs. 1D X Mark II). I don't really expect that to change, but Canon may surprise me.

 

[Michael Clark]

Since 5D2 the 5 series has more megapixels than the 1. So why should it change?

Maybe it can 8K 120fps as video or later stills for the sport photographer wet dream.... ?

If the R1 has lower resolution than the R5, that means the R3 is a one-off model that will be replaced by a more rock-solid reliable R1. If so, then the R1 will not appear until Canon has fully figured out the rare "freezing" issues of R3 and R5 bodies.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Thus, I don't think there's really any spec or feature that Canon is waiting for before they feel comfortable calling an R-mount camera the flagship.

How about the ability to autofocus on a simple, horizontal line?

 

[koenkooi]

The obvious thing that the R5 Mark II would change is the hot shoe. The new style one would require a replacement for the GP-E2 or as others have said built in GPS. One thing I would love is the ability to turn the camera off. No really turn the camera off, not just the sleep it has now, especially if the GPS is built in.

The GP-E2 worked fine on my rental R7 and also on my personal R8, both have the new fangled shoe.

 

[unfocused]

...then the R1 will not appear until Canon has fully figured out the rare "freezing" issues of R3 and R5 bodies.

I have three R bodies that freeze to various degrees -- R3, R5 and R7. Only my original R never froze. If Canon hasn't figured it out by now, I expect it's time to declare freezing a feature and not a bug.

 

[Ian K]

The GP-E2 worked fine on my rental R7 and also on my personal R8, both have the new fangled shoe.

Yes, it like the older flashes it looses weather sealing. You would need to add the adapter to correct that.