Steve Spencer
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
artsupreme wrote:
I posted these two comparisons below in another thread. IMO it's only worth the upgrade if you shoot a lot of very fast moving objects or you shoot a lot of video:
It depends on what you shoot and your budget. The R5II is a better camera mostly just for AF, 30fps vs 20fps, and faster readout speed - so less rolling shutter than the R5. But the new R5II sensor comes with more noise than the R5. So if you don't shoot a ton of fast action and don't need the best AF available, then R5 is no slouch. R5's AF is very good and it has cleaner files while being quite a bit less money if you buy used under 2k. I'm a two camera minimum guy and I would rather have (2) R5 bodies than (1) R5II. I currently own (2) R5II's but I could easily go back to the R5's and use them for another few years and be happy.
There's also pre-capture in the R5II which IMO is mostly a marketing gimmick but has some uses, for example if you are shooting birds fly off perches all day (perpendicular only). I've owned my R5II's since before they were released and I turned on pre-capture once to test it. It also has a special eye focus feature which rarely works for most people. It has some other gimmicky AF features that I don't use but could be useful I guess. For video, the R5II is much better due to cooling, clog2, 8k 60, etc, which is where I would say a worthy reason to upgrade over the R5.
If you are coming from a DSLR shooting landscape and wildlife, you will be blown away with the R5, and then the R5II would just be better for AF and fps if you are shooting very fast moving wildlife or BIF. I'm not a birder as I shoot a lot of portraits, but occasionally while in between shoots on location I'll point my camera at some birds, and yes the R5II will lock on better than the R5, and it will also track BIF better. However, you can still easily get the job done with the R5. The R5's did amazing for me on multiple African safaris when I had a chance to bring my R3's, but I left R3's at home because the R5 AF is more than adequate for small-large mammals and I wanted the resolution. I usually mix it up between the AI AF and traditional AF methods and the R5 produces great results. I was able to successfully shoot full speed cheetahs with the R5, so there's not much it can't handle, but you will get rolling shutter effects if you look closely in some scenes.
I would say if you are not budget limited, get the R5II and you'll feel like you are cheating and never miss, and you'll come home with tons of keepers and try to decide which ones you'll be throwing away. Or you wont' throw them away because they are all so good, and your storage needs will ballon. If you are budget limited, I would get (2) used R5's for a little bit more than an R5II and you'll still be blown away but it will miss more with less FPS, so less keepers for you to throw away than the R5II. R5II you can adjust FPS as well, so if you wanted to shoot 20 or less you can. You really can't go wrong with either camera.
If you are a pixel peeper, you might not like the noise of the R5II, so you might want to use both before deciding. Good luck....Show more →
I mostly agree with artsupreme, but I will add a bit of nuance. The first thing to notice is how similar the IQ will be between the 2 cameras. They have basically the same resolution and similar noise and dynamic range to their sensors. What the R5 MKII can do much better than the R5 is sensor scan speed, which allows it to much more effectively use its silent electronic shutter for stills and greatly reduces the jello wobbly type of effect for video. So the big take away is that the R5 II is better suited for fast moving action including its AF and faster frames per second (fps).
For stills the differences in noise are very small and flip depending on what mode you use the camera. Here is a comparison of the dynamic range, which will also predict noise, for the two cameras using single shot or low fps:
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R5,Canon%20EOS%20R5%20Mark%20II
What we see is a very small advantage for th R5 up to ISO 800 at which point they perform pretty similarly. This comparison is most favorable to the R5 over the R5 II, but it suggests at most a tiny advantage for the R5 at higher ISOs.
Here is a comparison of the two cameras using the mechanical shutter at 12 fps (the fastest you can shoot with the mechanical shutter for both cameras):
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R5(HS),Canon%20EOS%20R5%20Mark%20II
(you will need to paste the link as the code did not copy properly)
We see that even when using the mechanical shutter when we are shooting faster the R5 II has a tiny advantage in DR and presumably noise, but again the cameras performance is very similar.
Finally, here is a comparison of the two cameras using the electronic shutter. The R5 II shoots faster in this mode (30fps vs. 20 fps), has a much faster sensor scan speed (so less--really almost no--movement distortion), produces files with a higher color bit depth (14 vs 12), and has a very small advantage in DR and presumably noise:
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R5(ES),Canon%20EOS%20R5%20Mark%20II(ES)
(you will need to paste the link as the code did not copy properly)
So which camera has better DR and noise really depends on what mode you shoot in, but overall these differences are all rather small. The big difference is the R5 II can shoot faster, with less movement distortion, and a higher color bit depth in the electronic shutter mode. If you would want to use this mode a fair bit, then I think the R5 II has a clear advantage. If you don't want to use this mode hardly ever, then AF would be the primary advantage to R5 II and the R5 is still quite good at that.
Personally, I have the R5 II for a very esoteric reason--I adapt Leica M mount lenses--and for doing that the R5 II is clearly better with less color problems than the R5, but not many people are going to care about that.
Finally, if you shoot a lot of video I would probably skip both of these cameras and check out the R5C, which in several important ways would provide a lot more video capabilities.
|
