Would you purchase another R5
- Thread starter Rick H
- Start date
I think the context is more like, if you had an R5 and accidentally dropped off a cliff into the ocean, would you replace it with another R5 or get something else?
Example: my EOS M died and the cost to repair it was the same as buying a new one, and just $20 less than the then-current M2. So I bought an M2.
Example: my EOS M died and the cost to repair it was the same as buying a new one, and just $20 less than the then-current M2. So I bought an M2.
Upvote
0
Knowing what the body cost and the investment most will have in L glass, again the R5 is the only choice for a high mp mirrorless if you want to stick with Canon.
This situation did happen to me as well, I ended up with two 5D II's because the mirror broke on my original during a shoot. Warranty repaired the first but I couldn't wait.
Edit: I guess with near 30K in Canon glass, another R5 would be purchased.
Upvote
0
It's a simple question, would you buy another one of any product. in case aR5. If the answer is yes, they must be happy with the product, doesn't mean they're going out and buy a second one. It just means they're happy with their purchase decision and they would purchase the same item over again, it's just a good indicator that the product functions as intended.
Upvote
0
With respect, “Would you buy another R5?,” isn’t the sane question as, “Would you buy the R5 again?” The first, asked of current R5 owners, does imply buying a second camera.
Upvote
0
I would buy a second one, yes. I'm extremely happy with mine, for photos and the occasional 4K 120 video. I'd like to have another, particularly for events so I don't have to change any lenses.
Upvote
0
Really it is not a simple question. A camera at this level is usually much cheaper than the investment in lenses. One thing I have learned about Canon over the years is that the niche a camera body fills, it usually performs very well in that niche. Seldom are there two cameras in the same niche. There are bodies with less functions, higher mp bodies that are slower, lower mp bodies that are faster and a high end series that is fast and durable. If you have bought in to the Canon R system and you are not happy with the R5 most likely it is because of a particular niche or function it doesn't full fill.
It is really of no consequence if someone would buy another or not because if they wanted the highest mp R body it is yours and their only choice.
But just to full fill your good indicator, the R5 does function as intended. I would buy it to replace it if it were lost or stolen. For what I do I would recommend it to a friend if he wants to go the Canon way.
Upvote
0
I see this as a more complex question than just about the R5 body. I bought my R5 18 months ago, not only based on the camera spec, but how it would perform with the lenses I had (Canon EF). Looking back it was the correct decision for what I mainly shoot, which are birds.
If I was to buy now I would want to wait to see what comes of the R7 as it might improve pixels on target. Again I am looking at the both camera and lenses (current EF and RF). Now if Canon were to release a light weight 600mm L lens with a reasonable aperture the R5 would be hard to beat.
If I was to buy now I would want to wait to see what comes of the R7 as it might improve pixels on target. Again I am looking at the both camera and lenses (current EF and RF). Now if Canon were to release a light weight 600mm L lens with a reasonable aperture the R5 would be hard to beat.
Upvote
0
After purchasing an R3, I would not purchase another R5 and actually have put my R5 up for sale.
Too many missed images that I surely would have got with my pro dslr bodies. The R5 is good, but the R3 autofocus is much better.
More accurate autofocus, no hunting when looking for birds in the canopy. And after shooting foxes with both cameras the R3 is a clear winner with more keepers and more of the difficult shots like the kits jumping in bad light.
Too many missed images that I surely would have got with my pro dslr bodies. The R5 is good, but the R3 autofocus is much better.
More accurate autofocus, no hunting when looking for birds in the canopy. And after shooting foxes with both cameras the R3 is a clear winner with more keepers and more of the difficult shots like the kits jumping in bad light.
Upvote
0
In the above situation I would be seriously tempted to replace my R5 with an R3 + used RP. I suspect that the improved AF would do more for me than the increased resolution in the R5. The used RP would be for situations where I want to shoot something macro-ish low to the ground, the grip on the R3 would get in the way of that.
But the most likely thing to happen is that I'd get another R5, it's a great camera for what I do!
Upvote
0
I would buy it again. For me, an amateur who does mostly travel photography, the autofocus is significantly better *for me* than any canon DSLR I had (various 5D models, 6D). The R3, while it looks amazing, is just too big for my preferences. I find it really easy to use, just point and click.
I still have an RP though with the 1.8 35MM that lives on it, as the quality vs size for the RP is just great.
I still have an RP though with the 1.8 35MM that lives on it, as the quality vs size for the RP is just great.
Upvote
0
I would 100% buy the R5 again. I'm interpreting your post as in do current owners have any regrets, and the answer is no for me. Now if I could afford an R3 I'd rather have that, but the price is just too much for me personally.
Upvote
0
Yes. Absolutely. No regrets on picking up an R5 in 2020. Amazing camera.
Not flawless, but FPS, ergonomics, IQ, focus peaking, IBIS (even on Sigma lenses), eye detect AF, high ISO performance, etc. All very useful. Cons exist, but most significantly, if you would not use the new features, the R5 may not impress you. One of those simple things, but I see people making that mistake. Say, comparing the R5 against a 5DsR on a tripod for a well exposed static subject. People have seen more detail out of the 5DsR in otherwise similar images.
Not flawless, but FPS, ergonomics, IQ, focus peaking, IBIS (even on Sigma lenses), eye detect AF, high ISO performance, etc. All very useful. Cons exist, but most significantly, if you would not use the new features, the R5 may not impress you. One of those simple things, but I see people making that mistake. Say, comparing the R5 against a 5DsR on a tripod for a well exposed static subject. People have seen more detail out of the 5DsR in otherwise similar images.
Upvote
0
Well to answer the question - no I would not purchase another Canon R5. After waiting for ages for the price to come down, last week I finally gave up waiting, sold my one remaining kidney and bought an R5 along with three RF lenses.
My initial observations are these:
1) Everything is more expensive on the Canon mirrorless system when compared with the DSLR/EF equivalents so it requires a huge investment just to buy a fairly basic R5 system. Also Canon seems to be limiting the supply of accessories and a cynic might say this is in order to keep the prices high. At the moment I can't even buy a spare battery for my new R5.
2) The size and positioning of some buttons on the R5 is far from ideal. In particular the lens release button is exactly where my middle finger lands when i am holding the camera with both hands, and the button has such a low profile that I don't realise it is there. Twice now I have inadvertently pressed the button the lens actually fell off the camera on one occasion. Fortunately I was just trawling through the menus and the lens just plopped into my lap so no damage was done but in future I must remember to avoid that button when holding the camera. This is in addition to all the other new stuff I need to remember.
3) The electronic viewfinder might be one of the best around but it does not compare well with an optical viewfinder. Those of us who have used a DSLR for many years will miss the clarity and responsiveness of the viewfinder on a DSLR.
4) As expected the battery life is poor and I have spent most of my first week disabling feautures in order to conserve battery life. So what is the point in buying a camera costing almost £4,300 if you are then going to disable many of its advanced features? If Canon ever decide to make some spare batteries available in this country then I will be able to carry a couple of spares, but for now I must operate the camera in miser mode.
Of course there are some positives too.
The picture quality is amazing - far better than anything my 5D mark 4 can produce and I am very pleased with the three RF lenses that I chose. They all perform extremely well.
Also, I have found that many of Canon's alarming warnings are untrue. For example I continue to achieve a burst rate close to 12 fps when using mechanical shutter, even when the battery charge is well below 50%. Although the High ISO of 102,400 is disabled when the camera is new, actually pictures taken at a very high can be used with a bit of noise reduction. They are certainly far better than pictures taken at very high ISO on my 5D mark 4.
Finally, when using my EF lenses on my R5 with the control ring adapter they all perform extremely well, far better than expected. This is great news because it means that I can continue to use my older lenses for a few years and give my bank account time to recover.
My initial observations are these:
1) Everything is more expensive on the Canon mirrorless system when compared with the DSLR/EF equivalents so it requires a huge investment just to buy a fairly basic R5 system. Also Canon seems to be limiting the supply of accessories and a cynic might say this is in order to keep the prices high. At the moment I can't even buy a spare battery for my new R5.
2) The size and positioning of some buttons on the R5 is far from ideal. In particular the lens release button is exactly where my middle finger lands when i am holding the camera with both hands, and the button has such a low profile that I don't realise it is there. Twice now I have inadvertently pressed the button the lens actually fell off the camera on one occasion. Fortunately I was just trawling through the menus and the lens just plopped into my lap so no damage was done but in future I must remember to avoid that button when holding the camera. This is in addition to all the other new stuff I need to remember.
3) The electronic viewfinder might be one of the best around but it does not compare well with an optical viewfinder. Those of us who have used a DSLR for many years will miss the clarity and responsiveness of the viewfinder on a DSLR.
4) As expected the battery life is poor and I have spent most of my first week disabling feautures in order to conserve battery life. So what is the point in buying a camera costing almost £4,300 if you are then going to disable many of its advanced features? If Canon ever decide to make some spare batteries available in this country then I will be able to carry a couple of spares, but for now I must operate the camera in miser mode.
Of course there are some positives too.
The picture quality is amazing - far better than anything my 5D mark 4 can produce and I am very pleased with the three RF lenses that I chose. They all perform extremely well.
Also, I have found that many of Canon's alarming warnings are untrue. For example I continue to achieve a burst rate close to 12 fps when using mechanical shutter, even when the battery charge is well below 50%. Although the High ISO of 102,400 is disabled when the camera is new, actually pictures taken at a very high can be used with a bit of noise reduction. They are certainly far better than pictures taken at very high ISO on my 5D mark 4.
Finally, when using my EF lenses on my R5 with the control ring adapter they all perform extremely well, far better than expected. This is great news because it means that I can continue to use my older lenses for a few years and give my bank account time to recover.
Upvote
0
