EOS R5 dips below 2000 euro used / Pros and cons of current mirrorless cams

[Andrew Reid]

Sharing my notes...

If I were to consolidate a few cameras (I'm selling 3-4 of them) into one newer one, which would it be?

My current main cameras are Fuji GFX 100 and Sony a7 IV. I sold the a1 as wasn't really using the extra resolution or speed, but mainly because of the risk of crazy depreciation now the new one is out... We'll come back to that in a moment though.

I see the EOS R6 Mark II is currently on sale for 1800 euros brand new, which seems like a good deal but then you realise a used EOS R5 costs about the same now as it's 4 years old.

Given the R5 does 4K/120p, internal 8K RAW, higher resolution stills, oversampled 4K from 8K, whereas the R6 Mark II is... erm... newer, maybe less overheating issues, the R5 starts to look like a better buy.... Although the R6 II has a much more convenient movie/stills switch and a proper mode dial.

Main drawback of RF cameras for me is the poor performance of IBIS when used with adapters and manual focus lenses. It almost stops working entirely. Same goes for EOS R3, and the R5C lacks IBIS entirely.

Now let's compare to Nikon

Z6 III is 2500 euros / dollars. It is very similar to the EOS R6 Mark II in most regards but the lens mount is more flexible and you get better IBIS no matter the lens. 6K, 4K120fps (cropped?), but is it better than an EOS R5?

Z8 would make more sense for me... but now we're in the 3500 euro range.

It's an exciting camera but at that price, we're back at looking at a used a1 surely? E-mount for me has more going than Z.

Problem is the Sony a1 used is still £3200/3800euro/dollar, so it hasn't come down much yet since the a1 II announcement... Better to wait until it has reached the 2500-3000 range, at which stage it's a no-brainer and would be my choice over everything else mentioned so far.

The 8K codec internally, is a match for Canon RAW and N-RAW in my experience.

The a7 IV is best bang for buck... 1400 used, for a camera with very little missing... No 4K120fps of course, and rolling shutter is higher than something like the Z6 III. 4K/60p is a crop, but I'm still more of a 24fps guy and it does that very well.

A9, the original one... is about the same price. If you don't mind the lack of LOG, 10bit codec, H.265, new colour profiles and 4K/60p, the a9 is very capable especially for stills. It's the only one that has a fast enough electronic shutter for under $1500 to truly be a silent stills camera like the Z8 and Z9.

Now to the latest and greatest, and we have to go to $5k-$7K realm... Doesn't seem worth it to me?

The mid-range is just so good now.

EOS R5 Mark II is an evolutionary update. EOS R3 doesn't do as much as a Z8 when it comes to video + IBIS issues. Z9 is trumped by the smaller and cheaper Z8 for the same spec. The A1 II and a9 III are just too crazy expensive, although really cutting edge.

Which would you choose between $2k-3.5K?

A7R V gets a shout?

[PannySVHS]

If you talk purely about video I would be intrigued by a used C70 for 3K. The image is no contest in its  RAW flavours, being on og Alexa level, though noise is less film like under extreme conditions in comparison. I paraphrase out of an article from German test site slashcam. Besides a fantastiv image it provides great usuability, regarding battery life, NDs and so on, all in a potrable package.

As a hybrid I would find the Z6III very tempting. For video I like the image the most from what I've seen on the web. Specs vs price ratio it's a champ imho. Next would be a used S1H, with some of best thick and slim codecs I've seen. Great image pipeline, superb build and a joy to use. I got the S1H and the S1, both are built of equal high quality, the S1H still feels looks and operates so much nicer for me. It would be endgame camera for me with less rolling shutter plus focus punsh-in while recording. The image provides beautiful quality for post work though taking a bit more work to get the most out of it if imo.

Shout for A7IV, especially if battery is as good as in the A73. I've seen stellar stuff shot by a buddy of mine. Dynamic range, color are top notch. Worse rolling shutter than a S1/H,5/II though?

R6II sounds interesting but I don't know much else besides hearsay.

So, of the newer cameras my choice would be to test out a Z6III.:)

[Andrew Reid]

Really the images are all very similar, you're just getting different ergonomics and mounts.

Even at just 50Mbit/s or 100Mbit/s H265 (like a Samsung NX1!), the image on these modern cameras in 10bit LOG holds up well against RAW at many many times the data rate.

We underestimate H.265

A7 IV for most people is the ultimate 4K image for the price (and oversampled from 7K!), if you don't mind the rolling shutter.

The S1H is smoother looking on fine detail thanks to the AA filter, but it's a chonky boy in comparison and of course for those who need autofocus a complete no-go.

The C70, I would not be as interested in... purely because it isn't full frame, but 90% of my lenses are.

Shout out to the humble Sigma FP-L... If you want the smallest possible thing to plonk on a tripod and do its best Alexa imitation, you can't beat the 4K Cinema DNG goodness on that... Just make sure you put it in oversampling mode (1.3x crop) and if you plan on digging deep into the shadows, use an SSD.

[eatstoomuchjam]

FWIW, if you're using EF lenses (or lenses that can adapt to EF), the C70 is vaguely like full frame, as Canon's EF-RF speed booster is good and can be bolted on so that it doesn't wobble.  It's a great suggestion.  Gorgeous image.

In the $3k range, one might also consider a used Komodo (still S35 so maybe not ideal for you) or if you want a camera radically different from your other cameras, a used Ronin 4D 6K (I just paid about $3k for mine thanks to the BF sale from lensrentals.com).  Having owned it for one day, I can already say that I wouldn't have it as my only camera, but it's unique among my cameras.  I also got a native M mount for it - swapping was easy and was quickly using my Leica glass.  Now I just need to wait for the focus motor to show up (and to come up with some way of getting a focus gear for my 35/2 and 24/2.8 which have the silly Leica tab on them, but that will also fit in the small space available for focus gears.

 

[MrSMW]

For stills, easy choices for me; Sony A7RV and Nikon Zf.

The Sony as my principle stills camera and the Nikon as my (other) pro camera, but more satisfying to use.

The Sony beats everything for me for its combo of; cost vs size vs features vs pixel count. 

The closest alternative for me would be Z8.

The Zf is slightly larger than I’d like but there is something about it I just love. A lot of things actually, otherwise I would not have recently bought another after regrettably selling mine in the Spring.

I really wanted a grey leather one, but it would have been about €750 more so that did not happen.

For video, S5ii. I might trade my remaining one for a Z6iii but not decided yet. Both fit my needs perfectly but the S5ii currently is my choice over the Z6iii because it has the LUT function and that just works for me.

If I did not need AF, the S1H without question. 

Within the price range mentioned, but even above that, I don’t think there is anything I’d change? Not for my real world use.

[IronFilm]

6 hours ago, PannySVHS said:

 If you talk purely about video I would be intrigued by a used C70 for 3K.

I've been seeing Sony PMW-F55 cameras go for half that, which is just insanely cheap. And Panasonic Varicam LT for sub $2K. Those would be at the top of my rankings if talking about purely for video. Cheapest ARRI AMIRA is still close-ish to nearly $10K, unfortunately.

Although that's just my personal opinions/preferences, and not what @Andrew Reidis looking for. Not sure why the FX3 doesn't get a mention? As is leaning towards Sony already, and is a more video focused camera than the a7. And could keep the GFX 100 for stills??

Also the Panasonic S5mk2 is worth a litlte bit extra consideration too?

 

 

[Andrew Reid]

I've never been a cinema camera shooter, I am mirrorless all the way and stills too.

[Andrew Reid]

8 hours ago, MrSMW said:

For stills, easy choices for me; Sony A7RV and Nikon Zf.

The Sony as my principle stills camera and the Nikon as my (other) pro camera, but more satisfying to use.

The Sony beats everything for me for its combo of; cost vs size vs features vs pixel count. 

The closest alternative for me would be Z8.

The Zf is slightly larger than I’d like but there is something about it I just love. A lot of things actually, otherwise I would not have recently bought another after regrettably selling mine in the Spring.

A7RV is an interesting one.

It has the new screen design which is fantastic. Gets it out the way of the ports too. Fantastic EVF, very good IBIS and latest AI AF

The ergonomics are superior to the a1 and a7 iv, and I really rate that 60mp sensor (similar to Sigma Fp-L and Leica SL3).

You could argue it is superior to the a1 if you don't need 4K120fps, as the binned 4K quality is actually a tad better than the a1 with less moire!

Where it is lacking by comparison to that beast is rolling shutter performance especially in 8K, and the top-bitrate 500Mbit 10bit 422 8K mode which the a1 got with a firmware update.

But for 4K, stills, 60p and ergonomics it's a winner.

[Andrew Reid]

Some good reviews by Connor here...

Sold his R6 II for the a7R V...

I've yet to try the Zf...

Time to get one might be when they put the Z6 III internals in it?

[Benjamin Hilton]

I'd have to agree that the Sony A7R IV is the best bang for buck and all around useful camera on the market right now. It doesn't have any huge headline selling points, but it just does video and stills really well. No major flaws, and just a gorgeous image. If you need to go cheaper, I'm leaning on FX30s. Still a great image, good form factor, and just a solid camera for the price. The Canon R7 is a solid option too in this cheaper category. It's pretty cool these cameras exist in this price bracket, that for under $1500 you can get good stills, solid 4k with good DR, good color, auto focus, solid audio, the list goes on. No excuse to not be out there creating good visuals these days

[MrSMW]

2 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

But for 4K, stills, 60p and ergonomics it's a winner.

I bought it purely as a stills machine over going medium format.

What it came down to in the end was cost of body, cost of lenses, range of lenses, size & weight of lenses, IBIS, AF, DR and that screen mechanism.

For me, it was a no-brainer really at around €3.5k in the Spring.

Ergo-wise, I do have the Smallrig baseplate on it as it's a bit too small without, plus the Peak Design hand/wrist thingy which makes for a nice snug grip with bigger lenses.

A set of f2.8 Tamron lenses; 20-40, 28-75, 70-180 make for a super compact, high performing kit.

One not so hidden gem, is the ability at a turn of a dial, to go from 61mp FF stills to still FF, but about 1/2 the file size and another turn of the dial, APSC 26mp stills that are fractionally higher res than other manufacturers 24mp FF files. Or at least how I have it set up.

Never shot video on it so can't comment.

I honestly don't think think there is anything to touch it right now all factors (that count for me) considered.

The Zf I think is one that you either 'get' or you do not.

It works for me and I'm currently using it in only one way and that is with the 40mm f2 SE lens and as my poor man's Leica Q3 43 that I cannot justify or afford and better than the X100VI.

In the future, it's also going to do static 4k 30p video with the Tamron 70-180 plus pull low-light stills with the Voigt 40mm f1.2 manual focus lens.

I do wish it was a little smaller, but that's my only real criticism.