R5 vs R6

[omega1978]

17 minutes ago, ntblowz said:

Btw if you got powerbank that supply 45W PD it can power the camera without drainig camera battery, but you still need a battery inside the camera.  The R and RP can only be charged (with PD) but not power on.

So you can power the cam a day long with a 20000ma PD Powerbank ?

How do you like the RF 35 on the R5 ?

[Django]

The RF 35 lives on my R6 (as the EF adapter is back-ordered due to the Canon factory fire). I've come to really appreciate this lens as it is quite compact, versatile, sharp, aberration free and has macro & IS. For the price it's killer, I like it so much I'm thinking of adding the RF 85 1.8 Macro IS.

[nathlas]

On 1/28/2021 at 11:28 AM, gt3rs said:

I have the R5 and the 1Dx III but not the R6 but the 1Dx III being somewhat similar (probably the same) sensor I may help a bit.

R5 FF 4k vs 1Dx III FF 4k is very similar as you say but the rolling shutter is a huge difference.

R5 4k 120 is miles ahead of 1Dx III 1080 120….. not even fair.

R5 4k LQ is miles ahead of 1Dx III 1080

 

On the processing of RAW vs. 10bit other than on an M1 or waiting on the new intel CPUs the RAW is way faster in Resolve PC. RAW is much faster. The problem for is mostly storage so it depends on your usage and archiving strategy. I would suggest downloading some files 10bit and RAW and compare on your machine.

 

So far I never hit the recording limit of the R5 and I mostly shoot RAW or 4k 120. But here is cold and I do a lot of 1-2min max takes with breaks in between. Before I was turning the camera off between takes now I don’t bother anymore.

But having say that not sure I would live with the R6 risk that I cannot shoot 4k…….. as I said 4k LQ is way better that full hd actually imo is a solid 4k….

 

R5 big plus:

- Rolling shutter

- RAW

- very usable 120fps

- Non overheating 4k modes FF and S35

R6 plus:
- cheaper
- 4k 60fps quality

Are these worth 2k more? Only you can really answer this.

 

 

 

High iso / low light capability ? Is there a difference to mention ? 

[independent]

6 hours ago, Django said:

The RF 35 lives on my R6 (as the EF adapter is back-ordered due to the Canon factory fire). I've come to really appreciate this lens as it is quite compact, versatile, sharp, aberration free and has macro & IS. For the price it's killer, I like it so much I'm thinking of adding the RF 85 1.8 Macro IS.

How loud is the autofocus on that STM lens? Would an external mic pick that up? 

I use the EF 35 IS version to take advantage of the ND filter adapter, but the autofocus noise on that USM lens is definitely noticeable. 

 

[Django]

1 hour ago, independent said:

How loud is the autofocus on that STM lens? Would an external mic pick that up? 

I use the EF 35 IS version to take advantage of the ND filter adapter, but the autofocus noise on that USM lens is definitely noticeable. 

 

STM is much quieter and faster than adapted USM lens but there is an external moving element so if you're planning on using a shotgun mic, it could still pick up movement during fast focus shifts in a quiet environment. 

[gt3rs]

I find quite noisy to be honest the RF 35 AF motor... also AF is not the fastest in town..... image quality is good and size and price great.

I hope that they will cone out with a 24mm version. As a compact travel 24mm plus 50mm 1.8 would be great.

RF 35 1.8 screen grabs from 8k RAW:

[UncleBobsPhotography]

2 hours ago, Django said:

STM is much quieter and faster than adapted USM lens but there is an external moving element so if you're planning on using a shotgun mic, it could still pick up movement during fast focus shifts in a quiet environment. 

I second this. I found the RF 50mm f/1.2 tempting, but after trying it I realized the focusing system was way too loud and the autofocus was quite jerky as well. I'm using an STM lens instead, and although it's not perfectly silent it's much more quiet and the focusing is smoother. It seems like the budget RF lenses are more suitable for video than the L RF glass.

[gt3rs]

13 minutes ago, UncleBobsPhotography said:

I second this. I found the RF 50mm f/1.2 tempting, but after trying it I realized the focusing system was way too loud and the autofocus was quite jerky as well. I'm using an STM lens instead, and although it's not perfectly silent it's much more quiet and the focusing is smoother. It seems like the budget RF lenses are more suitable for video than the L RF glass.

The 70-200 2.8 RF is very smooth, silent and fast compared to the RF 35 1.8 so not sure you can generalize. 

[ntblowz]

11 hours ago, omega1978 said:

So you can power the cam a day long with a 20000ma PD Powerbank ?

How do you like the RF 35 on the R5 ?

Gonna be using it tomorrow for a livestreaming samoan/white wedding, there will be lots of performers for the reception from different families. Theoretically 20000mah 3.7v is around 4x more power than 2130mah 7.2v so if 4k last 1.5 hours on battery it should last 6 hours? (could be less due to conversion) 

I like the RF35 for stills, for video I use Sigma 35 1.4 with VND adapter, work really good.

 

11 hours ago, Django said:

The RF 35 lives on my R6 (as the EF adapter is back-ordered due to the Canon factory fire). I've come to really appreciate this lens as it is quite compact, versatile, sharp, aberration free and has macro & IS. For the price it's killer, I like it so much I'm thinking of adding the RF 85 1.8 Macro IS.

RF 85mm F2 IS is pretty good, I have it and love it! The macro make it a more versatile lens than normal 85mm lens.

[ade towell]

My friend has the RF f2 85mm and 35mm f1.8 - they are both surprisingly noisy, why are so many of Canon's decent lenses even the new ones so horribly loud when focusing? The only quiet ones I've used are the relatively slow ef-s zooms. Fuji and Sony both have some pretty much silent fast lenses. For all Canon's excellent AF the noise from their lenses is quite disappointing and distracting when in use

[independent]

Huh, yeah interesting, I guess people have different tolerances. I often shoot in a sound-controlled environment so the AF noise is pretty important to me. Especially with smaller crews now, it's good to have another usable audio track from the camera. 

STMs aren't uniformly quiet. USMs are also not all the same. I have a 24 f2.8 IS USM that is much quieter than the 35 f2 IS USM or RF 50 1.2.

The Nano USM models are all great, virtually undetectable. I just wish Canon would make fast primes w/ Nano USM. 

Anybody have experience with quiet, fast Sigmas?

[omega1978]

On C70 surprisengly tamron 24-70 g2 was more quite then rf 28-70 or adapted ef usm lenses

[gt3rs]

In general I prefer the EF lens as the vND adapter is just too good to pass, plus you can buy some good ones "cheap" on the used market.

I have the RF 35 1.8 (mostly for is compactness so I can keep it the jacket pocket) and the RF 70-200 2.8 (my EF 70-200 had an accident 😞 and the weight/size of the new one was too hard to pass), If the RF 70-200 F4 would have had a tripod collar would have been maybe even a better choice.

I don't do stuff on sound sensitive places yet the RF 35 1.8 I find it a bit disturbing.

I have these EFs and to me they seems all quite quiet in term of AF all USM:

16-35 2.8 II

24 1.4 II

50 1.2

24-70 2.8 II

200-400 4

 

 

[Dunjoye]

Why are the images on both these cameras appear to be grainy? Most videos I have seen anyway..

[Django]

@Dunjoye not sure what you mean, I find the IQ super clean. Much less noise than on any previous gen Canon tbh. Obviously high-ISO introduces noise, but I find the noise on R6 to be very fine grain and quite filmic compared to the horrible banding present on older sensor models. You can also turn NR off which is good.

 

Re: AF Lens noise

I don't have much experience with RF lenses but they do seem louder than their L counterparts. I've noticed quite few RF have open barrel front moving elements so that could be part of it. Fast F1.2 and hybrid macro lenses like the RF35 are going to struggle to be silent as well.

Optically, the RF lenses are quite amazing though. I've got my eyes on the RF 15-35mm 2.8L IS. I don't do much telephoto stuff and like to shoot close to my subjects.

[Dunjoye]

12 minutes ago, Django said:

@Dunjoye not sure what you mean, I find the IQ super clean. Much less noise than on any previous gen Canon tbh. Obviously high-ISO introduces noise, but I find the noise on R6 to be very fine grain and quite filmic compared to the horrible banding present on older sensor models. You can also turn NR off which is good.

 

Re: AF Lens noise

I don't have much experience with RF lenses but they do seem louder than their L counterparts. I've noticed quite few RF have open barrel front moving elements so that could be part of it. Fast F1.2 and hybrid macro lenses like the RF35 are going to struggle to be silent as well.

Optically, the RF lenses are quite amazing though. I've got my eyes on the RF 15-35mm 2.8L IS. I don't do much telephoto stuff and like to shoot close to my subjects.

Maybe, it's just the videos have seen shot with it on Youtube. My EOS-R is clean to be fair, but from an Ex 1DC user, I always used this as a bench mark . 

[plucas]

Curious to know if "EOS Cinema Original" does provide colours equivalent to the 1DC as the manual says.

Another user on here commented that the R5 does so remarkably well.

[ade towell]

Anyone know where there's some R5 4k hq and lq 24 or 25p footage to download of peoples faces not landscapes, am finding it surprisingly difficult? Got some of R6, would like to compare.

Any HD footage from either camera would also be good. Thanks

[Video Hummus]

6 hours ago, ade towell said:

Anyone know where there's some R5 4k hq and lq 24 or 25p footage to download of peoples faces not landscapes, am finding it surprisingly difficult? Got some of R6, would like to compare.

Any HD footage from either camera would also be good. Thanks

I could probably hook you up this weekend. 

[ade towell]

Ah that would be wonderful thank you