There is probably something up with your R5, as I have had reasonably good experiences with the AF on my R (and my old RP when I had it). That's one thing MILC has going for it in my book, focus consistency.Interesting to see that you made the same move that I did, but my conclusions are very different from yours. This is after using the R5 for 10 weeks, so it is not simply a lack of familiarity with the R5.
The main issue I have is that a large percentage of shots taken with the R5 are not in focus. When this happens, something in the shot is sharp, but it not where I positioned my focus point or points. It is as if the camera has ignored the focus points and focussed somewhere else instead.
The camera has now gone back to Canon to see whether there is a fault and this has given me the opportunity to use my 5D mark 4 again. What a difference. Every shot is sharp, the viewfinder is much clearer than the one on the R5 and overall the camera is much easier to use. So what do you think I should do? Even if Canon are able to repair the R5 I am not sure that I want to use it any more. So do I persist with the R5 or just accept that it was a waste of money and go back to my 5D mk4?
After some more experience out with the R, I find it's growing on me and I've already found a couple of use cases where I chose it over the 5D4. That said, I'm still keeping the 5D for its faster speed and quicker responsiveness in dynamic situations. IQ-wise, not a noticeable difference between the two cameras...if anything, the final output (post-processed) of the R files seems to be perhaps slightly crisper than that of the 5D images, but I think that's due to DLO being turned on for R files in DPP by default.
Upvote
0