2 ms·

You made a solid choice, the 5D4 is an excellent body- I usually keep it nearby and constantly with a lens on it ready to go when I need it. Have you tried the

You made a solid choice, the 5D4 is an excellent body- I usually keep it nearby and constantly with a lens on it ready to go when I need it. Have you tried the eye tracking auto focus on the R5? It's actually pretty phenomenal and can help a lot when photographing wildlife. Funny story though, if you're photographing animals with white butts and black tails (like a bighorn sheep) from behind..it's gonna track the butt as if it were a face. That made me laugh when it happened.

vr46 4y ago
That is quite funny, computers are very thorough. I knew the 5D4 would be the end of the line, and I ditched my 1DX which was just too heavy, the 4 is better in every way. I had the original 5D and the mk2, and very impressed at how refined the 4 is. I did try the R5 and I also used the original eye-tracking Canon EOS 5 back in the 90s so I can see things have come a long way :) The deal-breakers on the R5 were: 1) Huge cost 2) Lack of GPS 3) New lenses required And the extra value of quality and video and speed weren’t enough to compensate. On those points, I also think there’s a bunch of trade-offs. Firstly, the file sizes. My first digital camera, the Nikon D1X, had file sizes of 5-6 Meg, and my Q2 is coming in at 85 Meg. That’s 17 times as much drive space needed to deal with this, not to mention network bandwidth to move everything around. Do I need this many pixels? Well obviously I want them, but I just sent out a 49 x 30 inch print to a client that was upsized in Topaz and was taken on the 21MP 5D2. Was it stunning? Definitely. Secondly, the lenses. They are ridiculously good these days, as they need to be to resolve for 60+MP sensors coming up. But they are also getting pricy and heavy. Do I really want to replace an entire bag of primes? I save 100 grams on the camera to lose it all tenfold on the lenses. This was always the biggest cost involved with a system. The R5 is hardly cheap but I’d honestly rather switch to Leica S at this point. Thirdly, at these pricing levels, we really are in Leica territory and the Q2 absolutely trounces Canon in terms of value and workflow. I’ve been running the Q2 for three years and it’s got 51 real MP to play with, a lens that makes you laugh with its ability, plus speed and control. It’s completely outgunned if we’re talking wildlife photography and long lenses, but on everything else it is camera number 1. DSLRs aren’t being truly killed by their mirrorless replacements, not yet maybe, but by anyone who can shoehorn smartphone tech into a real camera. Maybe interchangeable lenses are the things getting in our way?

vr46 4y ago

That is quite funny, computers are very thorough. I knew the 5D4 would be the end of the line, and I ditched my 1DX which was just too heavy, the 4 is better in every way. I had the original 5D and the mk2, and very impressed at how refined the 4 is. I did try the R5 and I also used the original eye-tracking Canon EOS 5 back in the 90s so I can see things have come a long way :) The deal-breakers on the R5 were: 1) Huge cost 2) Lack of GPS 3) New lenses required And the extra value of quality and video and speed weren’t enough to compensate. On those points, I also think there’s a bunch of trade-offs. Firstly, the file sizes. My first digital camera, the Nikon D1X, had file sizes of 5-6 Meg, and my Q2 is coming in at 85 Meg. That’s 17 times as much drive space needed to deal with this, not to mention network bandwidth to move everything around. Do I need this many pixels? Well obviously I want them, but I just sent out a 49 x 30 inch print to a client that was upsized in Topaz and was taken on the 21MP 5D2. Was it stunning? Definitely. Secondly, the lenses. They are ridiculously good these days, as they need to be to resolve for 60+MP sensors coming up. But they are also getting pricy and heavy. Do I really want to replace an entire bag of primes? I save 100 grams on the camera to lose it all tenfold on the lenses. This was always the biggest cost involved with a system. The R5 is hardly cheap but I’d honestly rather switch to Leica S at this point. Thirdly, at these pricing levels, we really are in Leica territory and the Q2 absolutely trounces Canon in terms of value and workflow. I’ve been running the Q2 for three years and it’s got 51 real MP to play with, a lens that makes you laugh with its ability, plus speed and control. It’s completely outgunned if we’re talking wildlife photography and long lenses, but on everything else it is camera number 1. DSLRs aren’t being truly killed by their mirrorless replacements, not yet maybe, but by anyone who can shoehorn smartphone tech into a real camera. Maybe interchangeable lenses are the things getting in our way?