Speaking of new cameras.

[Basil]

My "main" Camera is currently a Canon 5D Mark IV, which came out back in 2016 so it's 6 years old (bought mine in 2018 during a B&H "flash sale"). Don't get me wrong, it's a great camera and I love it, but now Canon is moving to a new system with their "R" series cameras. They are also now developing lenses with the new RF mount and are no longer going to be producing any new EF mount lenses. The EF mount was introduced in 1987 so I'd say it's not surprising that Canon is finally introducing a new mount. The RF mount allows for a lot of flexibility not available in the EF mount (like having a ring on an RF lens that can be assigned to control pretty much whatever you want (things like ISO, aperture, and exposure compensation). Canon also sells a series of adaptors than will allow using any EF-S or EF lens on an RF mount camera. From all the reviews I've seen this works perfectly with no degradation of image quality. So, if someone like me has a lot invested in EF glass, they could move to the "R" series cameras without the need to immediately go out and buy a bunch of RF glass.

The biggest advancements with the new "R-series" cameras include IBIS (In-body image stabilization) and an other-worldly Auto Focus system. My current 5DIV does not have IBIS but most of my Lenses have in-lens IS which yields about typically about 3 stops of image stabilization. In practical terms, that means (in theory) that, if you could get sharp images with a certain focal length lens at 1/125th second, you could (again in theory) get equally sharp images at 3 stops slower shutter speed (e.g., 1/15th). When you have the new R series IBIS, that alone is advertised at 5-stops of stabilization, while using with an IS lens yields up to 8 stops of stabilization. As I say, this is all in theory. I do know IS helps a lot, but I doubt I'd ever be able to shoot hand held at 1/15 and get sharp images, with our without IS.

But I digress.

While I love the 5DIV, I am pretty much certain that I want to move to mirrorless but am torn (agonizing is more accurate) between going for the Canon R6 or spending another $1400+ (plus more $$ for CFe cards and a CFe reader) for the R5. The R6 is a 20MP camera while the R5 is a 45MP camera.

My biggest concern is having 10MP less with the R6 compared to the 5D4 (30MP) and whether the additional MP of the R5 is worth the rather hefty additional expense (it's not just the additional $1400 for the camera, but also the added expense of using CFe cards compared to SD cards, which would include having to buy a CFExpress reader).

I know that more pixels on the R5 means I can crop in more aggressively and retain IQ, but in practical real-life situations, how often would that be an issue and how much difference will it really make in practical terms?

Of course if the R6 had just a tad more MP (like even 24) that would make the decision a little easier. But going down to 20Mp from 30MP is a hard pill to swallow, if only psychologically, but at the same time justifying more than $1400 + additional CFe card/ reader costs for the R5 is also psychologically a hard pill.

I do like the fact that the R6 uses the same cards in both slots whereas the R5 uses two different card types (I hate that about my 5D4). Aside from the MP and some increased video capability (which isn't that important to me) it seems the two are very comparable when comparing all other features.

I guess the real question would be how much I can still crop in with the R6 before seeing any noticeable degradation of IQ? I know the R5 would be "better" than the R6 but is it $1400+ more expense for cards better?

Since I previously had a Canon 6D, which was also "only" a 20MP camera, I decided to dig out some images taken with both my old 6D and my current 30MP 5DIV. These images were both shot at ISO 100 with a 300mm lens at f4. I then cropped in 100% on both images to see if degradation is really noticeable on a 20MP camera. Between these two sets of images, which one do you think was shot with the 20MP 6D and which with the 30MP 5DIV.


Camera A - Uncropped


Camera A Cropped to 100%


Camera B Uncropped


Camera B Cropped

 

[DrEntropy]

My WAG: The 5D-IV for "A".

But for all practical purposes, they seem indistinguishable.

 

[Basil]

Your WAG is correct. The Hawk was taken with the 5D4 and the Sparrow was taken with the 20MB 6D. I agree that they are nearly indistinguishable. In fact, I sent the same images to a friend of mine who currently owns the much higher megapixel R5 (45MP), and who previously owned the 5D Mark IV. He guessed (incorrectly) that the Sparrow image was taken with the 5D Mark IV.

I guess my take away is that the sensor on the R6 is more than adequate for 99% of what I might be shooting unless I really get aggressive with cropping in. But in these sets of images, I cropped the equivalent of what would be a 100% (1:1) Zoom in Lightroom and the R6 holds up very well in my humble opinion. Another thing that makes me feel a little better about only having "only" 20MP in the R6 is that it is the same 20MP sensor that Canon puts into their $6500 flagship 1DX Mark III camera. <<(click) So, it it probably a very excellent sensor and certainly newer tech than my old 6D.

There seems to be a notion in the digital world that more pixels is better, and I suppose there is some truth to that. But depending on what you shoot, how much you crop and how large the prints you make are, that difference may not really matter in the end.

I am contemplating getting into the mirrorless world and the R6 is the camera I'm seriously looking at. I'd love to consider the 45MP R5, but there is a lot in the negative column with that camera. For one thing, the price is significantly higher thant the R6 (+$1400). The larger sensor means slower read outs (thus buffer fills up quicker) when doing high-frame rate shooting, and of course the need for twice the storage space for the same set of images. Plus the R6 used two SD II cards while the R5 uses one SDII can but one much more expensive CF Express card (which would also require purchase of a new card reader). If I do end up with an R6 it won't be for a while yet. I need to save my pennies and maybe there will be a good Christmas season sale like there was when I bought my 5D4.

Not in any rush.

 

[DrEntropy]

I've tried to maintain a consistency with as many things as possible. i.e: all our DSLR Nikons handle the same or VERY nearly. Cards for the digitals as well. Would I like to have a mirrorless DSLR Nikon? Sure. Would it get me "better" images? That's a big maybe. And it would mean new gla$$ too. If I were still a PPoA member, shooting for money, it could be justifiable if the primary end-use was ads and/or 'slick' publication. But for even news photo work, my guess is the APS-C sensors in the cameras here now would be absolutely fine.

I've managed to accrue a fair range of lenses, benefiting from those who just have to have the latest-greatest gear, so they sell off the "old stuff" on-line at what I consider good value-for-money. An example is the two 17~55mm ∱2.8 DX zooms, a $1,200.00 (list price) optic when new, for around $300 each. Had to get two or I'd be forever hunting down Mitsy's camera bag to retrieve the only one. Several primes have found their "forever home" in my bag as well. A 50mm ∱1.4, 35mm ∱1.8 and a 40mm ∱2.8 Micro. All in super nice condition, all about a third of what they would cost if purchased new. And even the APS-C sensors at 20MP-and-a-bit in the D7500's and 24 in the D7200 produce images I'd put up against most anyone's. IMHO content kicks a$$. At this point pixel count is more a 'bragging rights' thing. With the software available now, computer image enhancement has replaced the darkroom. The old joke about "Focusing Fluid" is obsolete. It can actually be done with software.

And as I've stated before, soon we'll see a Pulitzer given for an image shot with a cellphone. That's inevitable IMHO.

 

[GregW]

Even having read the spoiler, I think the sparrow looks sharper. There is falloff in focus on the hawk's front feathers but that may be due to a bird that took up too much DOF.

You could check out the Sony A7R IV as well. 61MP, 2 SD card slots and if you include a Metabones adaptor for your Canon lenses, $400 less than an R5.

 

[Basil]

Yeah, thanks but Imma Canon fanboy

 

[GregW]

My solution still allows you to be a fan boy by using Canon lenses. In addition to a much better camera.

 

[Basil]

My solution still allows you to be a fan boy by using Canon lenses. In addition to a much better camera.

Ok, let me put it another way. I’m a Canon Camera and lens fan boy!

 

[DrEntropy]

Purist!

I got to looking at some of the Fuji & Sony mirrorless offerings. Not likely to make a jump, just wondering what's out there other than the Nikons.