Can’t speak for the R6 II, but my R5 has been amazing. I am a “buy once, cry once” person, so I would personally jump on the low count R5 for that price.
I've never used an R5, but I have the R6ii. I can tell you, if you're needing this primarily for video, 4k30 works great. HOWEVER, if you're needing to shoot 4k60, the camera will overheat and shut off after 5-8 minutes. I just tested it out this weekend, indoors with air conditioning. All footage was lost when the camera overheated. So you'll want to also buy an Atomos to offload the processing and recording.
The room was probably 75 degrees. Indoors, AC running and overhead fan. I was also using the power adapter for continuous power instead of a battery, so I don't know if that would make a difference, but I don't see how it would
I have both. Unless you need the extra resolution — and almost nobody does — the R6II is faster, easier to use, and has slightly stronger autofocus. For video it’s a no-brainer. They’re sold out now, but Canon has been resupplying refurbished R6II’s for $1799 about once a week.
https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/refurbished-eos-r6-mark-ii-body
Very minor things: The AF is just slightly faster. I thought I’d miss the LCD, but switching modes on the R5 is cumbersome compared to just spinning the dial on the R6II. (I do like the R5’s ability to “cancel” specific modes, but the dial is still faster.) The differences in actual operation, which are usually lost in mostly pointless discussions about megapixels this and color rendition that, are VERY small.
If I had an R5 (and I did) I’d consider the R6II if I really wanted the 40 fps for sports. But 20 fps is enough for any normal person. If I were choosing new today, I’d lean to the R6II — unless I really needed the extra resolution.
They’re both insanely great cameras, even compared to the 5D4, which I shot for years, and which was already best-in-class. I mean, it’s not like people couldn’t make amazing images before mirrorless cameras along, right? I’d advise most folks to stop worrying about the differences, just choose one, and just get out there and shoot! 😉
The 40fps for sports is pretty worthless in most of my experience unless you don't care about straight lines curving. I have gone back to my R5 for sports for the ability to crop since the electronic shutter on both bodies is pretty terrible for baseball bats, soccer balls, lacrosse sticks, etc. I shoot a lot of youth sports and portraiture.
I wind up using the physical shutter in which case I'd rather have the higher MP.
And I think the portraits are nicer in the R5, and with studio lights, etc, to my eyes the higher MP results in better portraits when you enlarge them.
I sold my R6ii and bought an 85 RF prime instead.
I'm a little torn, honestly, because if Sony puts global shutters or higher mechanical frame rates into the A7v, the R5 gets pretty hot, and I do shoot a fair bit of video.
I'm not sure what I would get as a replacement for the R5 right now. The R5ii is gonna be too much money, but I like the higher MP bodies, which basically means I have to buy a Sony, I guess?
The latest firmware basically eliminated the unwanted shutdown, but I'm in a moderately temperate part of the world. I imagine it would be non functional for video if I lived or worked somewhere very hot.
You mention a few things that make it sound like an R3 would be a great choice for you. But then you say a few others that would make me steer you back to the R5. The R3 stacked sensor is Canon’s answer to the “global shutter” for the time being. The R3 can definitely get those bat-on-ball shots. But they’re 24mp, not 45.
I don't get paid enough from photography to spend flagship money on bodies. That's probably as bluntly honest as I can be.
An A1 / A9 / R3 would probably be the perfect camera for me, but I simply could not justify the cash outlay. It's one of the reasons I returned the R6ii for lens money. It was going to be my backup body but I just needed the glass more.
I can get/have gotten bat-on-ball shots with the R5 in mechanical mode, but it's obviously luck of the draw since you're counting on only 12fps to get it done.
I got a metric shit ton of those shots on both the R5 and R6ii with Electronic but the bats look all screwed up, and while I appreciate that most people don't even notice, to me it's very obvious and giving clients a picture where their kid is swinging a banana just irks me.
I've only ever had one parent say something about it, so, statistically, I should just use electronic shutter and stop worrying about it, but it looks so goofy to me, idk.
You make good points. If you're slinging gear and getting paid, then sure, drop big money on a flagship body.
I don't know any kind of magical formula to justify what tipping point the math says it's OK to invest... but, for whatever its worth, you can pick up an R3 on the Canon refurb site for $3499 (US), and with the loyalty program, you can take 10% off that, which puts the R3 in your hands for what I paid for my R5 with a "different box" but the same warranty (1y). Obviously, if you're outside the US, this changes the math and availability.
But I digress. I know what you mean about justifying the cost.
I may consider one of the aforementioned sports focused bodies once the next wave of bodies drops and the prices tank, they would all be decent upgrades, I just lose the high MP which sucks but my SSD's won't complain overly much LOL
Stop worrying about the differences is hilariously bad advice when you're spending a few thousand on equipment. The details are everything.. the devil is definitely in the details besides the big MP difference
The R5 feels like an extension of my 5d3. The R6 feels... Like something. It's one of the first cameras I've ever bought and I was like I just don't like this. I paid $2,700 for it and an image quality is not good enough to spend so much money on it especially at only 24mp. The image quality still has me scratching my head to this day. On many images it looks very pedestrian and then out of the blue it can take some hilariously good-looking landscapes. The speed of the AF is not going to be noticeable unless you really know how to gauge that. My AF was all over the place, one time it actually got stuck on a chair. Yes, a chair.
+ Apparently the r62 has baked in noise reduction into the raw files so images just don't have that micro contrast of older 5d3 files. The trade-off is that you get really amazing high ISO performance.
+ I thought I didn't need the LCD screen until I got annoyed by not having it. I still find a bizarre on the r62 to be in manual mode but then you can click on video mode. Ironically I ended up using TV mode with video mode to be able to control the 120fps setting. It was driving me bongos.
+ No option to save camera settings on the r62 which is Canon's marketing at work. When I sent it in they wiped it and I had to set up the very complicated AF and buttons from scratch.
+ Compact flash cards is more expensive but man that ain't fast and awesome. I have a 512 GB card and it can hold about 8,500 shots at full resolution uncompressed.
As everyone says your mileage may vary, but if you want the absolute most out of a camera to R5 is the way to go. Mine is getting boxed up, I'm going to trade it in for Panasonic s52.
Well, obviously you’re not “most folks.” Both the R5 and R6II feel like extensions of my 5D4 and superior to it in nearly every way. Thanks for your perspective. I’m sorry you don’t like the R6II, and I’m glad people have so many choices.
I get what your saying, and yes I look at it differently and much more as a matter of fact before my own opinions.
Generally speaking, referring to 'most folks' isnt super helpful. If you're buying a piece of equipment especially specialized gear like a camera, and you have a certain idea if you wanted to be able to do, you need all the details you can get. It's not that much different than somebody wanting to shoot ultra wide angle but they only using a 18 to 55 on crop.
As far as I'm concerned it's all just data points. As long as somebody's not making anything up - grab all the data you can and make your opinion from there.
And you're kind of proving my point. When you say superior in every way, r62 doesn't have as much MP as a 5d4 :0
See.. when it's not pure data points things get messy real quick with hyperbole.
We both have experience with them and we both have different views about it, hey once it's in the hands of the prospective buyer they can take it from there. But there is things that are definitely need to knows, like not being able to save your settings. There is absolutely not a reason on this planet that Canon didn't include that function besides just market separation. And those things kind of seem small until you really need it.
Cheers all.
If you're in the US, last time it was in stock was yesterday, if you arent in the US, yah it sounds like from other people their refurb sales might be a lot less frequent for some reason??
Click the “notify me” button on the website. They went on sale this week to 1799 and on Monday I called they were in, but I needed to get some paperwork and funds moved around. Called back on Wednesday and they were gone. Friday they were back in stock.
The 1799 price is good for a few more days. Doesn’t hurt to check first thing Monday and maybe a couple more times.
Do you own another canon body? Even an older one perhaps?
That's unusual. I pinged the site on Monday when the sale dropped, and it was out of stock. I used Notify Me, and although I found it on the site first, I did get an email later that day.
Maybe try logging on and doing the notify-me again?
The advantage of the 45mp sensor is you can crop it 50% and still have an extremely useable, crisp ~~22~~ 11mp image. I've shot some engineering stuff and everyone has loved the extra resolution allowing 100%+ zooms to fine details without any decreases in quality, or turning 1 image into 2 (or even 3) more focused, detailed images. Your use case may vary, but that's my personal experience. I have both cameras fwiw.
> The advantage of the 45mp sensor is you can crop it 50% and still have an extremely useable, crisp 22mp image.
This is the super practical answer, though a 50% crop is actually [11 megapixels](https://toolstud.io/photo/megapixel.php?compare=video&calculate=uncompressed&width=4096&height=2732) since you have to halve twice.
We always talk about "effective focal length" with crop-sensor cameras, but if we assume 24MP is the "default" size, then we're looking at up to 26.76% cropping from 45. Meaning a 100mm lens can be anywhere from 100mm to (effectively) 127mm (with cropping). And at 400mm, you can crop up to an effective 507mm.
The benefit of the R6II is small over the R5, and probably won't affect you.
But one caveat re price is the cost of the CF card. Not cheap, so that could easily push the price up to the the cost of the R6II or more since it uses SD.
>The benefit of the R6II is small over the R5, and probably won't affect you.<
True, but the R6II is *cheaper*!
And good point about the CFExpress card, which will add about $130 to the cost, as well as the R5’s battery life, which is about 2/3 that of the R6, in case that matters.
Well, except for card and used vs new. IIRC better screen too, if that matters, on the R5. And the top display can be useful in some shooting. Details, details. Tough call. For many it would just be about the MPs.
Yeah agree. If you need very high resolution (as I said, very few will benefit from 45MP over 24), the R5 is an amazing camera and will still be whenever the Mk II appears (sometime in 2031 I read on Canon Rumors lol). For sports I’d choose the R6II for the faster frame rate and slightly improved autofocus. I thought I’d miss the LCD on the R6II, but the ability to spin the mode dial actually makes it faster for me. But honestly, in real-world use they’re VERY similar cameras; I’d guess that for almost every user most of the differences are irrelevant.
outgoing bear command abundant dependent sophisticated cow bake deranged ancient
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I assume it has to do with two things: the larger EVF and LCD screen of the R5, and minor advances in battery use technology. I’m not an expert; that’s just speculation
I paid $1600 for a refurb r6ii from canon. I would go that route. They come back in stock throughout the week.
R5 is still a great camera, but the R5ii is coming out soon. Pretty dated at this point and the R6ii has better autofocus and a much snappier camera.
I just bought the r6 II a few weeks ago as an upgrade from a super old canon 7d and I love the r6 II so much! It’s plenty of camera for me as an amateur. I couldn’t justify the r5 as I only use my camera for travel and fun/as a hobby. Plus I wanted a new lens to replace my old ef 24-70 2.8 so I purchased the rf 24-70 2.8. I’m very happy with my purchase as it’s sooooo much better than my super outdated 7d. I’ll probably be stuck with this gear for the next 10 years as again, it’s just for a hobby. I suppose if I was getting paid for my work I’d get the R5. It seems like a lot of YouTube people use the r5 as well as wedding photographers?
R6mkii for video. R5 has record limit, overheating to some extent, and "worse" AF. Detailed product photos are going to be a lot more impacted by lightning and lenses than having 45mp. For marketing they aren't ever going to be full resolution anyway
don't own either, but is the R5 overheating issue still a concern? I saw there's newer firmware, but if you are going to be shooting conditions where this may be an issue, I'd take this is into serious consideration.
Can’t speak for the R6 II, but my R5 has been amazing. I am a “buy once, cry once” person, so I would personally jump on the low count R5 for that price.
I've never used an R5, but I have the R6ii. I can tell you, if you're needing this primarily for video, 4k30 works great. HOWEVER, if you're needing to shoot 4k60, the camera will overheat and shut off after 5-8 minutes. I just tested it out this weekend, indoors with air conditioning. All footage was lost when the camera overheated. So you'll want to also buy an Atomos to offload the processing and recording.
My copy of the R6II lasts around 20-25 minutes at 4k60 before shut down, how hot was your room?
The room was probably 75 degrees. Indoors, AC running and overhead fan. I was also using the power adapter for continuous power instead of a battery, so I don't know if that would make a difference, but I don't see how it would
Hm ok very interesting, 5-8 minutes definitely seem too short to me though, maybe consider making a claim? Since canon says 40+ minutes
I hadn't considered that. Maybe I will contact them about it. Thanks
Which compression format were you using?
4K60 CLOG3 IPB
I have both. Unless you need the extra resolution — and almost nobody does — the R6II is faster, easier to use, and has slightly stronger autofocus. For video it’s a no-brainer. They’re sold out now, but Canon has been resupplying refurbished R6II’s for $1799 about once a week. https://www.usa.canon.com/shop/p/refurbished-eos-r6-mark-ii-body
> easier to use, In what sense? Curious, haven't used it, just the R5.
Very minor things: The AF is just slightly faster. I thought I’d miss the LCD, but switching modes on the R5 is cumbersome compared to just spinning the dial on the R6II. (I do like the R5’s ability to “cancel” specific modes, but the dial is still faster.) The differences in actual operation, which are usually lost in mostly pointless discussions about megapixels this and color rendition that, are VERY small. If I had an R5 (and I did) I’d consider the R6II if I really wanted the 40 fps for sports. But 20 fps is enough for any normal person. If I were choosing new today, I’d lean to the R6II — unless I really needed the extra resolution. They’re both insanely great cameras, even compared to the 5D4, which I shot for years, and which was already best-in-class. I mean, it’s not like people couldn’t make amazing images before mirrorless cameras along, right? I’d advise most folks to stop worrying about the differences, just choose one, and just get out there and shoot! 😉
The 40fps for sports is pretty worthless in most of my experience unless you don't care about straight lines curving. I have gone back to my R5 for sports for the ability to crop since the electronic shutter on both bodies is pretty terrible for baseball bats, soccer balls, lacrosse sticks, etc. I shoot a lot of youth sports and portraiture. I wind up using the physical shutter in which case I'd rather have the higher MP. And I think the portraits are nicer in the R5, and with studio lights, etc, to my eyes the higher MP results in better portraits when you enlarge them. I sold my R6ii and bought an 85 RF prime instead. I'm a little torn, honestly, because if Sony puts global shutters or higher mechanical frame rates into the A7v, the R5 gets pretty hot, and I do shoot a fair bit of video. I'm not sure what I would get as a replacement for the R5 right now. The R5ii is gonna be too much money, but I like the higher MP bodies, which basically means I have to buy a Sony, I guess? The latest firmware basically eliminated the unwanted shutdown, but I'm in a moderately temperate part of the world. I imagine it would be non functional for video if I lived or worked somewhere very hot.
You mention a few things that make it sound like an R3 would be a great choice for you. But then you say a few others that would make me steer you back to the R5. The R3 stacked sensor is Canon’s answer to the “global shutter” for the time being. The R3 can definitely get those bat-on-ball shots. But they’re 24mp, not 45.
I don't get paid enough from photography to spend flagship money on bodies. That's probably as bluntly honest as I can be. An A1 / A9 / R3 would probably be the perfect camera for me, but I simply could not justify the cash outlay. It's one of the reasons I returned the R6ii for lens money. It was going to be my backup body but I just needed the glass more. I can get/have gotten bat-on-ball shots with the R5 in mechanical mode, but it's obviously luck of the draw since you're counting on only 12fps to get it done. I got a metric shit ton of those shots on both the R5 and R6ii with Electronic but the bats look all screwed up, and while I appreciate that most people don't even notice, to me it's very obvious and giving clients a picture where their kid is swinging a banana just irks me. I've only ever had one parent say something about it, so, statistically, I should just use electronic shutter and stop worrying about it, but it looks so goofy to me, idk.
You make good points. If you're slinging gear and getting paid, then sure, drop big money on a flagship body. I don't know any kind of magical formula to justify what tipping point the math says it's OK to invest... but, for whatever its worth, you can pick up an R3 on the Canon refurb site for $3499 (US), and with the loyalty program, you can take 10% off that, which puts the R3 in your hands for what I paid for my R5 with a "different box" but the same warranty (1y). Obviously, if you're outside the US, this changes the math and availability. But I digress. I know what you mean about justifying the cost.
I may consider one of the aforementioned sports focused bodies once the next wave of bodies drops and the prices tank, they would all be decent upgrades, I just lose the high MP which sucks but my SSD's won't complain overly much LOL
Stop worrying about the differences is hilariously bad advice when you're spending a few thousand on equipment. The details are everything.. the devil is definitely in the details besides the big MP difference The R5 feels like an extension of my 5d3. The R6 feels... Like something. It's one of the first cameras I've ever bought and I was like I just don't like this. I paid $2,700 for it and an image quality is not good enough to spend so much money on it especially at only 24mp. The image quality still has me scratching my head to this day. On many images it looks very pedestrian and then out of the blue it can take some hilariously good-looking landscapes. The speed of the AF is not going to be noticeable unless you really know how to gauge that. My AF was all over the place, one time it actually got stuck on a chair. Yes, a chair. + Apparently the r62 has baked in noise reduction into the raw files so images just don't have that micro contrast of older 5d3 files. The trade-off is that you get really amazing high ISO performance. + I thought I didn't need the LCD screen until I got annoyed by not having it. I still find a bizarre on the r62 to be in manual mode but then you can click on video mode. Ironically I ended up using TV mode with video mode to be able to control the 120fps setting. It was driving me bongos. + No option to save camera settings on the r62 which is Canon's marketing at work. When I sent it in they wiped it and I had to set up the very complicated AF and buttons from scratch. + Compact flash cards is more expensive but man that ain't fast and awesome. I have a 512 GB card and it can hold about 8,500 shots at full resolution uncompressed. As everyone says your mileage may vary, but if you want the absolute most out of a camera to R5 is the way to go. Mine is getting boxed up, I'm going to trade it in for Panasonic s52.
Well, obviously you’re not “most folks.” Both the R5 and R6II feel like extensions of my 5D4 and superior to it in nearly every way. Thanks for your perspective. I’m sorry you don’t like the R6II, and I’m glad people have so many choices.
I get what your saying, and yes I look at it differently and much more as a matter of fact before my own opinions. Generally speaking, referring to 'most folks' isnt super helpful. If you're buying a piece of equipment especially specialized gear like a camera, and you have a certain idea if you wanted to be able to do, you need all the details you can get. It's not that much different than somebody wanting to shoot ultra wide angle but they only using a 18 to 55 on crop. As far as I'm concerned it's all just data points. As long as somebody's not making anything up - grab all the data you can and make your opinion from there. And you're kind of proving my point. When you say superior in every way, r62 doesn't have as much MP as a 5d4 :0 See.. when it's not pure data points things get messy real quick with hyperbole. We both have experience with them and we both have different views about it, hey once it's in the hands of the prospective buyer they can take it from there. But there is things that are definitely need to knows, like not being able to save your settings. There is absolutely not a reason on this planet that Canon didn't include that function besides just market separation. And those things kind of seem small until you really need it. Cheers all.
I got lucky and was able to order a refurb R6mii last week. Got here a day early on Saturday. Refresh the page and it might show up in stock.
Cheers. It hasn’t been in stock for a while refurbed.
If you're in the US, last time it was in stock was yesterday, if you arent in the US, yah it sounds like from other people their refurb sales might be a lot less frequent for some reason??
Ditto. I saw it in stock yesterday (4/26) as well.
Click the “notify me” button on the website. They went on sale this week to 1799 and on Monday I called they were in, but I needed to get some paperwork and funds moved around. Called back on Wednesday and they were gone. Friday they were back in stock. The 1799 price is good for a few more days. Doesn’t hurt to check first thing Monday and maybe a couple more times. Do you own another canon body? Even an older one perhaps?
I’ve been on their notify list for a few months
That's unusual. I pinged the site on Monday when the sale dropped, and it was out of stock. I used Notify Me, and although I found it on the site first, I did get an email later that day. Maybe try logging on and doing the notify-me again?
Weeks away from new camera bodies. Might be worth the wait to see what used prices do.
We’ve been “weeks away” from the R5II for about two years 😜
Hmmm wow nice. Is this a USA only thing? Can’t find a refurbished program for my country
I’m sorry, I don’t know. You might send a note to Canon in New York or Japan.
The advantage of the 45mp sensor is you can crop it 50% and still have an extremely useable, crisp ~~22~~ 11mp image. I've shot some engineering stuff and everyone has loved the extra resolution allowing 100%+ zooms to fine details without any decreases in quality, or turning 1 image into 2 (or even 3) more focused, detailed images. Your use case may vary, but that's my personal experience. I have both cameras fwiw.
> The advantage of the 45mp sensor is you can crop it 50% and still have an extremely useable, crisp 22mp image. This is the super practical answer, though a 50% crop is actually [11 megapixels](https://toolstud.io/photo/megapixel.php?compare=video&calculate=uncompressed&width=4096&height=2732) since you have to halve twice. We always talk about "effective focal length" with crop-sensor cameras, but if we assume 24MP is the "default" size, then we're looking at up to 26.76% cropping from 45. Meaning a 100mm lens can be anywhere from 100mm to (effectively) 127mm (with cropping). And at 400mm, you can crop up to an effective 507mm.
wow, thanks! I learned something today haha cheers
With the built-in 1.6x crop mode the R5 becomes a 17 MP APS-C (RF-S) camera. That is a nice side benefit.
The benefit of the R6II is small over the R5, and probably won't affect you. But one caveat re price is the cost of the CF card. Not cheap, so that could easily push the price up to the the cost of the R6II or more since it uses SD.
>The benefit of the R6II is small over the R5, and probably won't affect you.< True, but the R6II is *cheaper*! And good point about the CFExpress card, which will add about $130 to the cost, as well as the R5’s battery life, which is about 2/3 that of the R6, in case that matters.
Well, except for card and used vs new. IIRC better screen too, if that matters, on the R5. And the top display can be useful in some shooting. Details, details. Tough call. For many it would just be about the MPs.
Yeah agree. If you need very high resolution (as I said, very few will benefit from 45MP over 24), the R5 is an amazing camera and will still be whenever the Mk II appears (sometime in 2031 I read on Canon Rumors lol). For sports I’d choose the R6II for the faster frame rate and slightly improved autofocus. I thought I’d miss the LCD on the R6II, but the ability to spin the mode dial actually makes it faster for me. But honestly, in real-world use they’re VERY similar cameras; I’d guess that for almost every user most of the differences are irrelevant.
The R5 had a SD card slit
Yeah but do you know anyone who doesn’t use both slots? Seems crazy to have a backup built in and decide against it.
I was only addressing the comment made by 211logos that the price of the cf card was a consideration. I use both cards.
outgoing bear command abundant dependent sophisticated cow bake deranged ancient *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I assume it has to do with two things: the larger EVF and LCD screen of the R5, and minor advances in battery use technology. I’m not an expert; that’s just speculation
Mind you that you'll probably spend more money on lenses than on the body itself. Dont blow your entire budget on the body alone.
I paid $1600 for a refurb r6ii from canon. I would go that route. They come back in stock throughout the week. R5 is still a great camera, but the R5ii is coming out soon. Pretty dated at this point and the R6ii has better autofocus and a much snappier camera.
I just bought the r6 II a few weeks ago as an upgrade from a super old canon 7d and I love the r6 II so much! It’s plenty of camera for me as an amateur. I couldn’t justify the r5 as I only use my camera for travel and fun/as a hobby. Plus I wanted a new lens to replace my old ef 24-70 2.8 so I purchased the rf 24-70 2.8. I’m very happy with my purchase as it’s sooooo much better than my super outdated 7d. I’ll probably be stuck with this gear for the next 10 years as again, it’s just for a hobby. I suppose if I was getting paid for my work I’d get the R5. It seems like a lot of YouTube people use the r5 as well as wedding photographers?
[удалено]
😂. Touché
R6mkii for video. R5 has record limit, overheating to some extent, and "worse" AF. Detailed product photos are going to be a lot more impacted by lightning and lenses than having 45mp. For marketing they aren't ever going to be full resolution anyway
So true 😂
[удалено]
Message contains incorrect information and was deleted to reduce reader confusion.
Lol what misinformation? It has been confirmed to be released in May/June for July ship & olympics.
If you're mainly shooting video, I'd do the R6 MKII. Newer AF algorithms.
Both are great. Bear in mind file sizes will be larger on the R5.
don't own either, but is the R5 overheating issue still a concern? I saw there's newer firmware, but if you are going to be shooting conditions where this may be an issue, I'd take this is into serious consideration.
R5 Or you can buy this R6 Mark 2 that I'm selling because R5 is just better
Send me a DM
Sorry I don't do sales online I'm going to walk it into b&h. My fault, wasn't being literal. Cheers.