Interesting that the shutter mode is not discussed. I wonder which you guys use: ES, EFCS or MS? Personally, I noticed that ES is just fine for most wildlife and landscape, however, EFCS produces slightly sharper images. Then there is the issue that the 1st image taken with EFCS – after turning the camera on – is always blurry. And the MS causes serious shutter shock (worst at 1/00, and noticable at 1/60 up to 1/400).
Heiko
October 27, 2021 1:59 am
Thanks for the review. I own the R5 together with the RF 15-35/2.8, the RF 24-105/4 and the RF 35/1.8. I also own a Nikon D850 and an assortment of Nikon lenses. The Canon R5 has a number of nice features, especially the focus system with people and animal eye detect. The focus works very well for video too. BUT, the Canon and the lenses I own are almost useless for landscape photography. The very expensive 15-35/2.8 is nothing more than a paperweight at 15-24mm. Whole areas are blurred, no matter what aperture I use (f5.6, f8, f11, etc.). I replaced the lens for a loaner and had similar issues. The 24-105 is even worse. It’s so bad that I deleted most of my photos I took. Again the issue is primarily on the wide end. There is no issue with blurriness/sharpness when photographing nearby objects, though. I haven’t figured out the reason, but I’m definitely not happy with it. Another issue for landscape photographers is dynamic range, where the Canon falls behind the Nikon D850. This becomes very obvious when processing the photos in Lightroom. Altogether, the Nikon D850 produces more detail (perhaps also due to the lack of an AA filter) and allows for better shadow recovery. The COVID situation has kinda forced me to get into video. I thought that at least in that respect the Canon R5 would be good (enough). Even though I installed the latest firmware, the camera overheats within some 7 to 12 minutes in all 8k, 4k HQ and 4k RAW / c-log modes. By the way, simply having the camera turned on in video mode – without yet recording – counts towards these recording limits. It then takes ages to cool down. I’m talking outside temperatures of around 30C or ~85F, which isn’t hot where I live. To summarize: The Canon R5 is good for people photography and probably wildlife. For the latter my D850 is no slouch either. The Canon R5 is no video camera (unless you call 7-12 minutes maximum recording time sufficient). To me, the RF lenses I own are a disaster.
About the RF 35/f1.8: It comes without a lens hood which is VERY bad. Not only is the front glass almost level with the front rim of the lens, totally exposing it to accidental touch or worse, knocking it into something. It doesn’t even have a proper lens hood mount. Unless the sun is in your back, without a lens hood the sun will hit the front glass, which can easily degrade image quality (contrast, sharpness, flare).
Only L-series lenses come with lens hoods and pouches. I know this from experience (nifty-fifty f/1.8, which is outstanding value).
Andy
June 20, 2021 6:49 am
“up to 8 stops of stabilization can be achieved when using RF lenses that offer stabilization themselves”
That’s not quite true. The 8 stops can be achieved with lenses having big enough image circle, no matter if they have IS or not. For example Canon rates the RF 85 1.2 at 8 stops.
Steve
May 19, 2021 3:14 am
Does anybody out there shoot motorsports with the R5? If so, how does the AF subject tracking compare with high-end DSLRs such as the 5D MKIV?
I am pretty happy with the IQ etc from the 7D2/5D3/5D4 combo I am currently using, but I would like to improve my hit rate when shooting fast subjects, particularly those approaching head-on.
Those who read this good luck
April 28, 2021 1:03 am
Is that a camera ?
EnPassant
April 25, 2021 5:28 am
The big problem with the Canon EOS R5 is the price. In USA it is 30% more expensive than Sony A7RIV with 61MP. In my country in Europe the difference is even greater with the R5 being 40% more expensive than A7RIV and 50% compared to Nikon Z7II.
Having a cost of two average month salaries after tax (Price for the R5 here including 25% sales tax is the equivalent of $6,200.-!) only those making money from photography, having an income well above average and very few enthusiasts with normal incomes stuck in the Canon system and sacrificing other things in life can buy this camera.
While the R5 (and R6) may offer a great leap in sensor improvements for Canon photographers the R5 sensor compared to the one in Z7II offer about the same image quality. So for users not needing the mostly small extra advantages of R5 the Z7II offers much better value.
Because of this Canon DSLR users who not yet bought any FF Canon mirrorless camera but plan to add a mirrorless FF camera might even consider buying a camera of some other brand as there now are AF adapters for EF lenses.
For those not afraid jumping into the L-mount the Panasonic S1R is on sale here for just $2,600,- including 25% sales tax! Add just $600,- and get the 24-105/4 as a kit lens! So two of these kits are almost the same price as one R5 without any lens!
While Canon have cheaper R-mount cameras it is only with the R5 and R6 Canon caught up with Sony’s sensor technology. EOS R use the sensor from 5DIV, that while acceptable is at least a stop behind in dynamic range even to the original Sony A7R. The sensor used in EOS RP is the one also used in 6DII. Despite being a year younger than 5DIV the sensor technology is older with clearly worse dynamic range at about the same level as the original 6D (which I have, although Nikon F is my main FF system) only with more MP. So in essence the tech of Canon’s FF sensors until R5 and R6 was at least 8 years behind Sony!
As I’m not into video(!) I’m not bashing the R5 for anything except the price. If it wasn’t for that latter thing I would consider getting one myself for use with the set of Canon lenses I have. But as it looks now I will have to wait a long time before that can happen. The recently presented EOS R3 is even more desirable as it looks to be the perfect universal camera and still quite compact despite the built-in vertical grip. But where I live that dream machine will probably cost a cool $10k including sales tax.
While the competition might offer better value for image quality non of the mirrorless FF systems make me feel hot. When I got into photography in the old analog, pre AF era I came to the conclusion that Nikon had the most extensive system offering the best features and also with the best looking (Ai-S) lenses and cameras. Only Contax could compete when it came to looks, but where more expensive and therefore out of the question.
But today I don’t have the same feel that Nikon is the clear number one brand. They still do very fine cameras and lenses. But while good the lenses look boring. The 1.8 primes seem to be the best in their category but are also the biggest and quite expensive. Nikon cameras may produce good colors and make the most of their sensors. But they are no longer technology leaders.
Sony now are leaders when it comes to AF-technology and also have the most attractive looking lenses among the big three, including also Canon and Nikon. Their GM primes all seem great and several of their lenses compare well in both size and performance to their nearest competitors. But the handling of the cameras, both ergonomics and interface is not on the same level as Canon who long have been a leader in that area. Also only the A7RIV (and A6600 aps-camera) is compatible with the LA-EA5 adapter for screw drive lenses. So those having A-mount lenses may be waiting for the A7IV rumored to have 30+MP.
Canon as said now have a couple of great cameras, though very expensive. Their lens program have the same issues. Some great L-lenses that are all very expensive, some also huge and heavy. Budget lenses that suffers from heavy vignetting, have cheaper STM-motors, and in some cases use very small apertures. The only thing saving Canon is that the EF lenses their DSLR users already have work very well adapted.
L-mount is smallest despite being supported by 3 companies. That can be noted in the lens line-up, especially at the long end. The availability of good adapters working with for example Canon’s EF-lenses also seem worse. Leica is mostly for people with doctor salaries. Both cameras and lenses look very attractive and are of course of premium quality but are all also very heavy. Panasonic have cameras and lenses for ordinary mortals as well as those with a special interest in video. Except for the S5 camera the other cameras are quite big and heavy. The lenses compare very well in both optical performance and looks with other Japanese brands. There are just still to few of them. And for full AF compatibility the Panasonic photographer must buy Panasonic lenses. That is however not enough to compete with the big three in AF-tracking. Sigma is a case of its own with the tiniest and most anorectic FF camera on offer. While more capable than it looks it is definitely not the camera for universal photography. Sigma have however started building a new line of native mirrorless lenses that will benefit also the other members of the L-mount family. But since they also make them in E-mount and surely later will adapt them to both Z-mount and R-mount that will be no specific L-mount advantage.
To conclude Sony have the most complete FF system at the moment and therefore may be the most attractive option for not invested in Canon or Nikon DSLR systems. For Canon and Nikon DSLR users moving to mirrorless staying with the same brand seem most logical as both EF and AF-S lenses can be adapted to the mirrorless cameras. But especially EF-lenses adapt quite well to Sonys cameras. As for Nikon they have unlike Sony no AF-adapter for screw drive lenses. So they autofocus as badly on Nikon Mirrorless cameras as on other brands! If Nikon want older users to stay brand loyal they should offer a screw drive AF adapter similar to the one Sony have.
So for the moment I make no mirrorless FF move. At some point I probably add a FF mirrorless camera for the advantage of EVF and IBIS using adapted lenses. But I don’t really see a need buying a new line of expensive FF lenses all over again at this point in my life. As for the mirrorless advantage in size I think that is best realized in a crop system. but that’s another story!
That is a very well put together overview of the camera market today! One thing I’d like to note about the new lenses – yes, they are more expensive than their EF counterparts. However, they are also (much) better in terms of image quality and even build. When I got my first RF lens (the RF24-105F4), I was astonished to find that it had even better build quality than the EF24-105F4 II, with which I was already very happy. And of course, image stabilization has also improved quite a bit – but that’s mainly due to IBIS and not lens stabilization. Of course, Sony has been in the mirrorless market for the longest time now among the big camera makers. However, I think with all the recent releases by Canon we can see that they’ll be quick to catch up with Sony. While I would’ve liked to see Canon adapt to mirrorless quicker I think their sheer size allows them to be a bit slower – they’ve been the largest camera manufacturer for something like 18 years in a row now, and that’s despite the years of Sony making incredible mirrorless cameras while Canon didn’t even have a mirrorless offering. I think their size also allows them to have a broader lens selection with some specialty lenses like Tilt/Shift (which, if I’m not mistaking, are not available for Sony cameras), tele-macros (the 180mm) or loupe-macros (the MP-E 65mm). Cheers, Michel
I must disagree. The RF lenses are a pleasure to look at. But concerning the image quality of the 24-105/f4 and the 15-35/f2.8 I have had bad experiences, at least for landscape photography. They are great at shooting a nearby brick wall or resolution targets, though. Try them on an actual landscape.
8K or 4K video at anything but the lowest setting won’t work for more than 10-15 minutes in an outdoor ~32C environment.
The stabilization is useless for video when you pan, causing a jumping between the frames that is intolerable. This could be addressed with an “active” mode similar to Nikon, but Canon doesn’t (yet) offer this mode.
My 15-35/f2.8 lens is currently at the Canon repair center in the hope they will be able to fix it. A loaner from the shop produced similar issues so I guess this is not a rare case.
As of today, the R5 is only 500€ more than the Sony. Plus it is a much faster camera with better video, and, what is my main concern, has a much worthier body and works in much lower temperatures. Sekond thing is: You never buy a body. You buy a system. I think, even when Canon entered the ML market later, they have much more interesting glas. They show what is possible with a bigger mount. They completely rethought lens designs. The 70-200s are just astonishing, and the f2 standard zoom replaces a whole palette of primes. For me, Canon has the most tempting offer if you are looking on spending 10k+ on a new system.
Christophe
April 22, 2021 12:53 am
A field article by a field photographer is good. But we have all read articles on the mechanics of the body. I’m not saying it’s not interesting, but I would have preferred more details on the quality of the images, compared to your photos taken with the other 5-series cameras. In any case, the photos are very nice. and speak for themselves
Hi Christophe Thanks for your comment and your compliment on the images. You are of course right, there are already quite a few reviews of the R5 out there. Sorry for not providing a more in-depth comparison of the image quality. Unfortunately I’ve already sold my DSLR and so I can’t compare the two side by side anymore, but I do have a few images that I did take with both cameras. If you have some specific questions maybe I can answer them for you, I’d be happy to! Cheers Michel
Marco
April 21, 2021 9:43 am
Nice review. In my opinion Canon has now eclipsed Sony in mirrorless. The AF is equivalent (or better) to Sony and combined with RF glass the image quality from the R5 and R6 is superior. Nikon Z is a distant third in AF performance and lens options.
Says every fanboy about their favorite brand. What RF lenses set Canon apart from Sony and Nikon in terms of image quality? I can name one or two that don’t have equivalents on the other systems and can also do the same for Nikon and Sony that Canon doesn’t match.
Although I am in Canon team I constantly hear and read about quality issues with new RF glass. It was proven time after time, in every single review, that Nikon has got the best quality glass. Sharp, no decentering issues, great colour and contrast.
Unfortunately, Canon and Sony seem to have the exact same issues with quality control in terms of glass.
Alan T
April 20, 2021 1:37 pm
So, it it worth considering trading my 90D for an R5?
Alan, this of course really depends on what you use your camera for. I have never used a 90D but it seems like a camera geared towards wildlife and action photography with its 10 fps and crop sensor. If autofocus is critical for you and you’ve got the spare money I would highly recommend switching, animal and eye detection AF on the R5 are that good. But if you’re happy with the camera you have I would certainly stick with it.
Joe
April 20, 2021 11:21 am
A great review based on realworld experiance! These reports are required for anybody (such as me) to diffenciate between marketing and reallife. I’m not in a hurry, but will certainly switch to any brand for mirrorless, mainly for precise AF (PD AF on dslr is fast but weak with open aparture pictures) and weight.
Thank you, Joe, I’m glad you found my review helpful! The AF performance of the new mirrorless cameras is certainly astounding and the R5 is no exception to this – it doesn’t even nearly play in the same league as my 5Ds R (granted, that camera was never made with great AF performance in focus, no pun intended).
Interesting that the shutter mode is not discussed. I wonder which you guys use: ES, EFCS or MS? Personally, I noticed that ES is just fine for most wildlife and landscape, however, EFCS produces slightly sharper images.
Then there is the issue that the 1st image taken with EFCS – after turning the camera on – is always blurry. And the MS causes serious shutter shock (worst at 1/00, and noticable at 1/60 up to 1/400).
Thanks for the review. I own the R5 together with the RF 15-35/2.8, the RF 24-105/4 and the RF 35/1.8. I also own a Nikon D850 and an assortment of Nikon lenses.
The Canon R5 has a number of nice features, especially the focus system with people and animal eye detect. The focus works very well for video too.
BUT, the Canon and the lenses I own are almost useless for landscape photography. The very expensive 15-35/2.8 is nothing more than a paperweight at 15-24mm. Whole areas are blurred, no matter what aperture I use (f5.6, f8, f11, etc.). I replaced the lens for a loaner and had similar issues. The 24-105 is even worse. It’s so bad that I deleted most of my photos I took. Again the issue is primarily on the wide end. There is no issue with blurriness/sharpness when photographing nearby objects, though. I haven’t figured out the reason, but I’m definitely not happy with it.
Another issue for landscape photographers is dynamic range, where the Canon falls behind the Nikon D850. This becomes very obvious when processing the photos in Lightroom. Altogether, the Nikon D850 produces more detail (perhaps also due to the lack of an AA filter) and allows for better shadow recovery.
The COVID situation has kinda forced me to get into video. I thought that at least in that respect the Canon R5 would be good (enough). Even though I installed the latest firmware, the camera overheats within some 7 to 12 minutes in all 8k, 4k HQ and 4k RAW / c-log modes. By the way, simply having the camera turned on in video mode – without yet recording – counts towards these recording limits. It then takes ages to cool down. I’m talking outside temperatures of around 30C or ~85F, which isn’t hot where I live.
To summarize: The Canon R5 is good for people photography and probably wildlife. For the latter my D850 is no slouch either. The Canon R5 is no video camera (unless you call 7-12 minutes maximum recording time sufficient). To me, the RF lenses I own are a disaster.
About the RF 35/f1.8: It comes without a lens hood which is VERY bad. Not only is the front glass almost level with the front rim of the lens, totally exposing it to accidental touch or worse, knocking it into something. It doesn’t even have a proper lens hood mount. Unless the sun is in your back, without a lens hood the sun will hit the front glass, which can easily degrade image quality (contrast, sharpness, flare).
Only L-series lenses come with lens hoods and pouches. I know this from experience (nifty-fifty f/1.8, which is outstanding value).
“up to 8 stops of stabilization can be achieved when using RF lenses that offer stabilization themselves”
That’s not quite true. The 8 stops can be achieved with lenses having big enough image circle, no matter if they have IS or not. For example Canon rates the RF 85 1.2 at 8 stops.
Does anybody out there shoot motorsports with the R5? If so, how does the AF subject tracking compare with high-end DSLRs such as the 5D MKIV?
I am pretty happy with the IQ etc from the 7D2/5D3/5D4 combo I am currently using, but I would like to improve my hit rate when shooting fast subjects, particularly those approaching head-on.
Is that a camera ?
The big problem with the Canon EOS R5 is the price.
In USA it is 30% more expensive than Sony A7RIV with 61MP.
In my country in Europe the difference is even greater with the R5 being 40% more expensive than A7RIV and 50% compared to Nikon Z7II.
Having a cost of two average month salaries after tax (Price for the R5 here including 25% sales tax is the equivalent of $6,200.-!) only those making money from photography, having an income well above average and very few enthusiasts with normal incomes stuck in the Canon system and sacrificing other things in life can buy this camera.
While the R5 (and R6) may offer a great leap in sensor improvements for Canon photographers the R5 sensor compared to the one in Z7II offer about the same image quality. So for users not needing the mostly small extra advantages of R5 the Z7II offers much better value.
Because of this Canon DSLR users who not yet bought any FF Canon mirrorless camera but plan to add a mirrorless FF camera might even consider buying a camera of some other brand as there now are AF adapters for EF lenses.
For those not afraid jumping into the L-mount the Panasonic S1R is on sale here for just $2,600,- including 25% sales tax! Add just $600,- and get the 24-105/4 as a kit lens! So two of these kits are almost the same price as one R5 without any lens!
While Canon have cheaper R-mount cameras it is only with the R5 and R6 Canon caught up with Sony’s sensor technology. EOS R use the sensor from 5DIV, that while acceptable is at least a stop behind in dynamic range even to the original Sony A7R. The sensor used in EOS RP is the one also used in 6DII. Despite being a year younger than 5DIV the sensor technology is older with clearly worse dynamic range at about the same level as the original 6D (which I have, although Nikon F is my main FF system) only with more MP. So in essence the tech of Canon’s FF sensors until R5 and R6 was at least 8 years behind Sony!
As I’m not into video(!) I’m not bashing the R5 for anything except the price.
If it wasn’t for that latter thing I would consider getting one myself for use with the set of Canon lenses I have. But as it looks now I will have to wait a long time before that can happen. The recently presented EOS R3 is even more desirable as it looks to be the perfect universal camera and still quite compact despite the built-in vertical grip. But where I live that dream machine will probably cost a cool $10k including sales tax.
While the competition might offer better value for image quality non of the mirrorless FF systems make me feel hot.
When I got into photography in the old analog, pre AF era I came to the conclusion that Nikon had the most extensive system offering the best features and also with the best looking (Ai-S) lenses and cameras. Only Contax could compete when it came to looks, but where more expensive and therefore out of the question.
But today I don’t have the same feel that Nikon is the clear number one brand. They still do very fine cameras and lenses. But while good the lenses look boring. The 1.8 primes seem to be the best in their category but are also the biggest and quite expensive. Nikon cameras may produce good colors and make the most of their sensors. But they are no longer technology leaders.
Sony now are leaders when it comes to AF-technology and also have the most attractive looking lenses among the big three, including also Canon and Nikon.
Their GM primes all seem great and several of their lenses compare well in both size and performance to their nearest competitors. But the handling of the cameras, both ergonomics and interface is not on the same level as Canon who long have been a leader in that area. Also only the A7RIV (and A6600 aps-camera) is compatible with the LA-EA5 adapter for screw drive lenses. So those having A-mount lenses may be waiting for the A7IV rumored to have 30+MP.
Canon as said now have a couple of great cameras, though very expensive.
Their lens program have the same issues. Some great L-lenses that are all very expensive, some also huge and heavy. Budget lenses that suffers from heavy vignetting, have cheaper STM-motors, and in some cases use very small apertures. The only thing saving Canon is that the EF lenses their DSLR users already have work very well adapted.
L-mount is smallest despite being supported by 3 companies. That can be noted in the lens line-up, especially at the long end. The availability of good adapters working with for example Canon’s EF-lenses also seem worse. Leica is mostly for people with doctor salaries. Both cameras and lenses look very attractive and are of course of premium quality but are all also very heavy.
Panasonic have cameras and lenses for ordinary mortals as well as those with a special interest in video. Except for the S5 camera the other cameras are quite big and heavy. The lenses compare very well in both optical performance and looks with other Japanese brands. There are just still to few of them. And for full AF compatibility the Panasonic photographer must buy Panasonic lenses. That is however not enough to compete with the big three in AF-tracking.
Sigma is a case of its own with the tiniest and most anorectic FF camera on offer.
While more capable than it looks it is definitely not the camera for universal photography. Sigma have however started building a new line of native mirrorless lenses that will benefit also the other members of the L-mount family. But since they also make them in E-mount and surely later will adapt them to both Z-mount and R-mount that will be no specific L-mount advantage.
To conclude Sony have the most complete FF system at the moment and therefore may be the most attractive option for not invested in Canon or Nikon DSLR systems.
For Canon and Nikon DSLR users moving to mirrorless staying with the same brand seem most logical as both EF and AF-S lenses can be adapted to the mirrorless cameras. But especially EF-lenses adapt quite well to Sonys cameras. As for Nikon they have unlike Sony no AF-adapter for screw drive lenses. So they autofocus as badly on Nikon Mirrorless cameras as on other brands! If Nikon want older users to stay brand loyal they should offer a screw drive AF adapter similar to the one Sony have.
So for the moment I make no mirrorless FF move. At some point I probably add a FF mirrorless camera for the advantage of EVF and IBIS using adapted lenses. But I don’t really see a need buying a new line of expensive FF lenses all over again at this point in my life. As for the mirrorless advantage in size I think that is best realized in a crop system. but that’s another story!
That is a very well put together overview of the camera market today!
One thing I’d like to note about the new lenses – yes, they are more expensive than their EF counterparts. However, they are also (much) better in terms of image quality and even build. When I got my first RF lens (the RF24-105F4), I was astonished to find that it had even better build quality than the EF24-105F4 II, with which I was already very happy. And of course, image stabilization has also improved quite a bit – but that’s mainly due to IBIS and not lens stabilization.
Of course, Sony has been in the mirrorless market for the longest time now among the big camera makers. However, I think with all the recent releases by Canon we can see that they’ll be quick to catch up with Sony. While I would’ve liked to see Canon adapt to mirrorless quicker I think their sheer size allows them to be a bit slower – they’ve been the largest camera manufacturer for something like 18 years in a row now, and that’s despite the years of Sony making incredible mirrorless cameras while Canon didn’t even have a mirrorless offering. I think their size also allows them to have a broader lens selection with some specialty lenses like Tilt/Shift (which, if I’m not mistaking, are not available for Sony cameras), tele-macros (the 180mm) or loupe-macros (the MP-E 65mm).
Cheers,
Michel
I must disagree. The RF lenses are a pleasure to look at. But concerning the image quality of the 24-105/f4 and the 15-35/f2.8 I have had bad experiences, at least for landscape photography. They are great at shooting a nearby brick wall or resolution targets, though. Try them on an actual landscape.
8K or 4K video at anything but the lowest setting won’t work for more than 10-15 minutes in an outdoor ~32C environment.
The stabilization is useless for video when you pan, causing a jumping between the frames that is intolerable. This could be addressed with an “active” mode similar to Nikon, but Canon doesn’t (yet) offer this mode.
My 15-35/f2.8 lens is currently at the Canon repair center in the hope they will be able to fix it. A loaner from the shop produced similar issues so I guess this is not a rare case.
As of today, the R5 is only 500€ more than the Sony. Plus it is a much faster camera with better video, and, what is my main concern, has a much worthier body and works in much lower temperatures.
Sekond thing is: You never buy a body. You buy a system. I think, even when Canon entered the ML market later, they have much more interesting glas. They show what is possible with a bigger mount. They completely rethought lens designs. The 70-200s are just astonishing, and the f2 standard zoom replaces a whole palette of primes.
For me, Canon has the most tempting offer if you are looking on spending 10k+ on a new system.
A field article by a field photographer is good. But we have all read articles on the mechanics of the body. I’m not saying it’s not interesting, but I would have preferred more details on the quality of the images, compared to your photos taken with the other 5-series cameras. In any case, the photos are very nice. and speak for themselves
Hi Christophe
Thanks for your comment and your compliment on the images. You are of course right, there are already quite a few reviews of the R5 out there. Sorry for not providing a more in-depth comparison of the image quality. Unfortunately I’ve already sold my DSLR and so I can’t compare the two side by side anymore, but I do have a few images that I did take with both cameras. If you have some specific questions maybe I can answer them for you, I’d be happy to!
Cheers
Michel
Nice review. In my opinion Canon has now eclipsed Sony in mirrorless. The AF is equivalent (or better) to Sony and combined with RF glass the image quality from the R5 and R6 is superior. Nikon Z is a distant third in AF performance and lens options.
Says every fanboy about their favorite brand. What RF lenses set Canon apart from Sony and Nikon in terms of image quality? I can name one or two that don’t have equivalents on the other systems and can also do the same for Nikon and Sony that Canon doesn’t match.
RF glass superior to Sony? No. Actually not.
Although I am in Canon team I constantly hear and read about quality issues with new RF glass. It was proven time after time, in every single review, that Nikon has got the best quality glass. Sharp, no decentering issues, great colour and contrast.
Unfortunately, Canon and Sony seem to have the exact same issues with quality control in terms of glass.
So, it it worth considering trading my 90D for an R5?
Alan, this of course really depends on what you use your camera for. I have never used a 90D but it seems like a camera geared towards wildlife and action photography with its 10 fps and crop sensor. If autofocus is critical for you and you’ve got the spare money I would highly recommend switching, animal and eye detection AF on the R5 are that good. But if you’re happy with the camera you have I would certainly stick with it.
A great review based on realworld experiance!
These reports are required for anybody (such as me) to diffenciate between marketing and reallife.
I’m not in a hurry, but will certainly switch to any brand for mirrorless, mainly for precise AF (PD AF on dslr is fast but weak with open aparture pictures) and weight.
Thank you, Joe, I’m glad you found my review helpful!
The AF performance of the new mirrorless cameras is certainly astounding and the R5 is no exception to this – it doesn’t even nearly play in the same league as my 5Ds R (granted, that camera was never made with great AF performance in focus, no pun intended).