CANON R6 WORTH BUYING? Canon R6 versus Canon 5D MK III
Вставка
- Опубліковано 2 жов 2024
- In this video, I compare images from a Canon R6 to my Canon 5D MKIII
Last week my great pal lent me his Canon R6 to use for the day. I was really looking forward to using it and pitting it up against my current camera. I use the Canon 5D MKIII.
Whistles & Bells
He knew I was looking to upgrade my camera this year and because he loved it so much he thought I would too! He's right, It is an amazing camera but is it good enough for me to part with my hard-earned cash?...
you'll have to watch the film to find out 😁
Malham, a village located in the Pennines, a very picturesque district of the Yorkshire Dales.
One of the many things Malham is famous for is it's ever-changing limestone infused hills, it's amphitheatre shaped cove and it was even mentioned in the doomsday book!
For me and countless other Landscape Photographers, it's probably best known for a certain lone tree. A tree that stands very proud on a limestone pavement.
Photographing a location previously never puts me off revisiting. It just fuels the inner creative in me. Right, time to grab the classics and then work the composition.
Please feel free to leave a comment
Gary
► DOWNLOAD the files ( tinyurl.com/ov... ) and compare them yourself!
► [Members ] THIS VIDEO CONTAINS 12 jpg + 12 RAW files + 1 DNG
Join my channel to get access to perks:
/ @garygough
Music:
My amazing music downloadable from Epidemic Sound
Music for content creators - Unlimited Access to 30 000 Tracks
TRY IT FOR FREE - tinyurl.com/y7...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MEMBERS ONLY AREA - JOIN my members-only group (£5.99/£8.99) and download every one of my pictures I show in my videos JPG & RAW
If I shoot a 9 image pano then you get all 9 RAW files.
It's a great way to support me and a great way for you to get hold of quality pictures to use personally. (Cancel your subscription any time)
Interested?
MEMBERS AREA
Claim every JPG + RAW file featured in my 2020 videos!
Watch this video for more info
► • CLAIM EVERY RAW + JPG ...
► JOIN HERE tinyurl.com/ss...
►THIS VIDEO CONTAINS 12 jpg + 12 RAW files + 1 DNG
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
►MY GEAR: tinyurl.com/y7...
This is a list of gear I use. Some of the links are affiliate links. It would be great if you used my links when making a purchase. It won't cost you a penny more and it will help to support my channel.
► WORKSHOPS: tinyurl.com/tr...
► MORE ABOUT ME: tinyurl.com/mpg...
► PERSONAL WEBSITE: tinyurl.com/k7v...
► FACEBOOK: tinyurl.com/hct...
► UA-cam CHANNEL: tinyurl.com/nue...
► INSTAGRAM: tinyurl.com/yc7...
Year 2032 - Canon 5D Mark III versus Canon R6 Mark IV - “Meh, I wasn’t blown away, I’ll stick with the 5D.” ... Gary G. 😁
lol I'd be more than happy with that 😁😁
@@GaryGough 😀. All in good fun. I’m glad you got I was kidding and not being nasty.
I'm not upgrading anytime soon to mirroeless as well.
You made some excellent points. I'm a professional photographer, in the U.S., specializing in people photography; portraits, gr. seniors, models, glamour, at at one time weddings. Studio and non studio work. I'm not into specs on a camera much either. My first digital camera was the Canon EOS 20D, then the 30D and the 40D. I've shot thousands of images with these various cameras. Ultimately I upgraded to the 7D and the 5DMKII. Which I used extensively . I now use a couple of 5D MKIVs. Being a people shooter I've enlarged images from the 20, 30 and 40D to 20x24 with no problems. And the 7D and 5D MKII produced equally good results with enlargements. I do have a Canon EOS R. And I use it on occasion, but I see no real difference between it and the 5D MKIVs. And I like the controls on the MK IVs better than on the R. I think most of the improvements most camera makers, including Canon, have made in recent years is in their video capability. I very much doubt I will move to the EOS R6 and certainly not the EOS R5. I think the cost is too high and the value isn't there for the work I do. This race to have more megapixels has become kind of ridiculous. And, like you, as a working photographer (I also teach classes and workshops as you do) I simply want a camera that has good ergonomics, great color (which Canon is known for) good glass, (which Canon is known for) and when I do my part helps me to produce excellent images. I too use the Canon EOS 24-105 extensively in my people photography and have no complaints about its sharpness at all. Actually many years ago, studio photographers used to encourage using softer lenses for studio portraiture because of the results they yielded. There's a limit to when sharpness becomes too much. Anyway, I just wanted to say I think you made an excellent video and it's good to see someone talking about how the photos look rather than all the specs and how good or bad video performance is. I've never had a client that wanted video and I'm not a UA-camr or Instagram Vlogger so I have no use for video. There are still a bunch of us photographers who could care less about video.
Cheers Guy, great points well put 👍👍
Yes the Eos R shares the same sensor as the 5D mkiv so the IQ is expected to be very similar. These sensors in the new Canons have made a generational leap as far as how much information they can record. The files are no longer CR 2, they are designated CR 3, after 16 years. Thats Canons way of telling us there's been a massive shift. As for the megapixel "wars", just remember the only reason digital cameras started off with low mpx counts was due to technology limitations. Subjects in the real world have infinite resolution , if you get what I mean. It's logical to try and record as much of that detail as possible to attain the highest IQ. This also allows us freedom to crop our photographs and hence have less nessecity to buy expensive longer lenses. For some reason, some photographers have this illogical, ideological thing against higher mpx counts, hence this "war" rubbish. Its not needed as much for some types of photography, but for other types its a very useful and welcome improvement . So if you you don't need a more accurate and lifelike photo, and the benefits it brings, then that's fine. But please don't assume that as camera manufacturers aspire to higher resolution sensors that its just some marketing race. It sort of is, but there's a reason in terms of actual photography behind it as well.
You had a 20d, a 30d, a 40d, a 7d and a 5d Mark iii. Yeah! You'll upgrade to the R6, or the R6 Mark ii or iii!! It's in your DNA!
@@markrigg6623 So you avoid buying expensive lenses by buying expensive, high resolution, cameras!! In the prints most people make (8×12, 16x20) no one is going to tell the difference between an image taken with 20 mpx and one taken with 45 mpx. The only place you will see a difference is in huge prints or, as you say, when you crop a small section and blow it up. If you need it, you need it. Most people don't.
@@alansach8437 Yep absolutely. 20 mpx is plenty for a final result in an image for 95% of people's purposes. Regarding camera bodies, there's high mpx bodies available relatively cheaply , at a fraction of the cost of esoteric telephotos. Second hand camera bodies depreciatiate fairly quickly, but lenses hold their value much, much better so even In the used market they cost an arm and a leg.
How refreshing to hear an established pro photographer not bowing to manufactures hype, well done Gary,
Just saying it as it is Stu 👍👍
For anyone watching in 2024: You now have to take into consideration the CRAZY cheap price point at which the 5D III sells for nowadays on the used market. I‘ve seen bodys for under 400€ (living in Germany) which is just bonkers for that kind of a bullet proof, professional camera.
However, I remember many times editing my 5D III photos back in 2013~2018 when I was frustrated by the limiting dynamic range of the sensor, especially in comparison to the Nikon cameras a few of my colleagues were using back then. And I’m glad to report that this frustration is gone with the newer generation R-Line Canon sensors. I own the R8 and when I first looked at the files from that 24MP sensor I was REALLY blown away by the amount of detail and the great dynamic range. Having tried Fuji, Nikon, Sony and Lumix FF cameras, this is the best sensor (in that megapixel range) that I‘ve ever used. And I believe it’s a good amount better than the sensor found in the original R6.
Oh bloody hell Gary! all the Canon 5D MKIIIs have all gone on Ebay none left, thanks mate!!!
Well, for me as a hobbyist landscape photographer, the Canon 5D Classic and 5D Mark II are ultimate DSLRs that produce outstanding results. Don't foresee the need for a new camera at all. Rather I would spend the budget to get some lenses that are missing in my arsenal.
FYI, I've shot with Canon 5D Mark III as well. It's another fantastic camera undoubtedly. However, I nourish a deep liking for Canon 6D. It's a gem of a camera.
Thank you for the video.
I went from a 700d to a 5d MK3 in the last year and I love it! It's honestly made a huge difference to me being able to find focus in low light when doing weddings and events. I've also added the 24-70 f2.8 mk1 to my kit which has also made a huge difference from only having a 50mm f1.8 and 400mm f5.6.
Great review. I’m still using my 5D3 for fashion work. Can’t wait to see your review of the R5.
Hi Gary, unprocessed the image of the 5D is definitely softer, but the difference is not the body, but the lenses. To be a bit soft unprocessed is not a bad thing, since you can sharp it during the processing, if there is enough resolution which are basically the same for both cameras. If you are only worried about the quality of the images, than there is no reason to upgrade, unless if you go to an R5, but it’s way more expensive. Or you should try the 5Ds that delivers an astonishing 50Mpix as a DSLR, since the main advantages of a mirrorless, image stabilization, auto focus on the eye, moving display, don’t make much difference taking pictures of a static landscape on a tripod. Thanks for posting this, great place to shoot and great images, congrats!
I love the theme - "Its not about the gear its about the pictures" - how very true !! Im sticking to my Nikon D750 for another 10 years :) Your dead right - if it doesn't blow your socks off it aint worth the money - and I'm not even a Yorkie.
The pictures are made by the gear remember. Some photography is easy, and the gear is relatively inconsequential. But some isn't. There's a huge difference between being a bird photographer and a portrait photographer for example. So beware of clever sounding but specious generalisations.
Im a D750 love it for what I do generally but I do need a bit of video AF action - so Im trying to choose between a R6 and a Z6 II.
sorry to be so offtopic but does anybody know of a trick to get back into an instagram account??
I was stupid lost my password. I love any tricks you can offer me.
@Mack Aaron instablaster =)
@Rocco Walker I really appreciate your reply. I got to the site on google and I'm trying it out now.
Takes quite some time so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
I admire your honesty and integrity sir. Always a pleasure to watch and learn from your teachings. Thank you so very much.
Both cameras are great. I use my R6 for video (4K is stunning!) but in my own comparison with my 5D Mark IV, it more than held up for landscapes. Gary didn't discuss shadow recovery, but I saw more shadow detail in my own R6 images, and I could see it in Gary's too. Eventually I'll get an R5 to replace the 5D Mark IV. In the interim, my 7D Mark II is gathering dust as it doesn't come close to the R6 in any way.
I got the R6 two weeks ago, I’m mainly a wildlife guy and the AF is incredible. I took it out at dusk a few days ago, it focused on a male Mandarin duck as it moved across the water in terrible light, I was very impressed. I upgraded from the 7D Mk1 which my 9 year old will now get along with my 100-400. I haven’t tried and landscape stuff yet, it’s been raining for days, I’m itching to got to a park I know of about 25 miles away which has swathes of spring crocus which will look great at this time of year, then the bluebells will be next.
Depends on what I'm shooting. Sports? Can't beat the R6 with 20 fps (digital shutter) and eye focus. Wildlife? Either one is great. Landscape? I prefer my 5D Mk IV. Canon has a policy of making lenses for specific camera types (Full frame, APS-C, M, and now R). I bought a couple of R adapters and can use APS and APS-C lenses.
y yo todavia aqui con mi T5i anhelando una 5D Mark IV
@@CalicheCz3D si tu T5i hace lo que necesitas, guárdala.
I agree with you Gary. That’s why I still have my 6D, because it takes beautiful pictures. But, I did buy the EOS R for the electronic viewfinder. It allows me to see the final exposure before I take the shot. Yes, it means nothing when taking long exposures. Now, I have 2 great cameras and I still use my EF lenses. I also think the 30MP image size is a sweet spot between 20MP and 45MP.
This is Sean in Atlanta. I have been a faithful follower of yours for several years and I enjoyed this video and I have to say I agree with you! I am looking forward to your review and comparison with the R5. But I think you did the right thing with this R6.
Sean
Cheers Sean xx
Truthfully, I was sad that they didn't come out with the 5DMV as well. I took a baby step 2 yrs ago and bought the RP as a "backup" to my 5DMIII, however I quickly learned that I miss some features from my 5DMIII which is why Im now researching the R6 or R6MII. I LOVE my 5DMIII and even when I do upgrade, I will not be parting with it. Ive had it for over 12 yrs and its a workhorse of a camera :)
I have the same situation with my 6D and the RP. I do love the way of working with the mirrorless but, in reality, any quality difference is marginal. Indeed, you can lift the shadows better on the 6D file!
@@deanrobertnoble138 I ended up taking the leap and getting the Canon R6MII! SO happy I did. My 5DMIII I can now see had major focusing issues, as Mt 70-200 works incredible with my new R6MII. I can also very clearly see why the R6MII VS the RP is much more comfortable for me too. I've so far kept the RP, for the resale value it's not worth it to me to loose $500 off what I paid! Plus, even though it doesn't compare to the bigger models, it is a great quality camera and images!
I absolutely love my R6... but the main point is: this guy is amazing :D
As a confirmed peeper I've looked at the raw images and to my eyes the R6/28-70 f2 is noticably better than the 5Diii/24-105 f4. However I bet I would struggle to tell the difference if you were using a 24-70 2.8. The 28-70 f2 seems like an odd lens to me.
Fantastic location by the way. You find some gooduns and make good use of them. Love the drone footage.
I have the 5D MKIII and the 7D MKII and now I am a proud owner of the R6. I mainly shoot journalist and street but also very often landscape and fine art. Also the lone tree you juts photographed has been on my bucket list for quite some time and on my next trip to the North East I will surely go and shoot it.
Just bought the R5 a couple of weeks ago. I’m primarily a wildlife shooter and so far results are excellent and the animal eye detect is fantastic! I’m a Canon 1DX shooter and so far I’m liking the R5 better.
the reason I didn't upgrade to the 1dxmkii, and the mkiii is a awful price, im going r6 for wildlife, as it seems a good bet, with many benefits of the r5, but a lower pixel count, 20mp is perfect for me, and the eye detect is similar to the r5 I think if ive done the research right, as a wildlife person id like to hear you opinion, it might be a eye opener to me, look forward to your reply
Great video Garry. As a 5D mkii and Mkiii user myself I’ve been waiting for a video like this. I recently did a video talking about why I don’t see any point in upgrading, and I noticed while you were in the field you did exactly as I alluded to in my video. The R6 didn’t change the way you take an image. And that’s it for me. Cameras go out of date so fast these days it’s hard to keep up. But do the new systems (unless it’s medium format or an upgrade from APSC) change how we take images? I don’t think they do. Well done, great video 👏
Cheers Dave 👍👍
I had a 5d mark iii and switched to an r6. I was not impressed at first but when I started using the right settings I got blown away. The resolution is better on the r6, way sharper with r lenses than the 5d. I didn't see it at first because I was using the mechanical shutter and it blurred my pictures around 1/100th s. The dynamic range is way better, the tilt screen saves me a lot of lying on the floor to get some shots and the main one: I don't have portrait pictures where eyes are slightly out of focus with prime lenses anymore. Where I was taking 10 pictures with my 5d I m now down to 1. For landscape photography the r6 is not as much of a jump as I thought it would be (except for DR) but for action and portrait it s huge jump forward.
I just purchased an 5d3 for $600 dlls, I have used an Ae1program, A2e, 30d, 50d, 7d, 7d2 and I was debating going to mirror less after see your review I’m very happy I did not upgrade. Thanks for that amazing comparison.
You've got yourself a real workhorse 👍👍
Great video Gary - really enjoyed it. The results didn't surprise me. I have a 5D Mk 4 and an R6. Which one I use depends on what I'm shooting, but the R6 really scores with faces (the eye detection is out of this world) and in low light when I can't use flash.
Great review Gary. Thank you.
I am still using my Canon 5D Mk2 . It just does a good job and earned my living through 10 years+ of being a wedding photographer and locationscout. My camera didn't catch a bullet but it went through a lot over the years. I love it when the metal is shimmering through, so the patina is great. Somehow I am even emotionally attached to this camera.
What one have to consider when investing in another camera is, that you almost always have to adjust your software and harddrives to the newer camera. Don't change a running system ...
Keep up the good work!👍
Excelente 😮 yo acabo de comprar la 5d mii y estoy contento, me podrías dar tu Instagram para hecharle un vistazo a las fotos ?🙏
Well done Gary. Although you have bucked the trend of always going for the latest gear, his podcast is encouraging to those of us who don't have money falling out of our pockets👍
Just saying it as it is :)
Great video. I love my 5D mark 3. I have the eos r and I can tell you I prefer to take photos with my mark 3. The colors and the way it renders is so much better than my R
You are so right Gary! I did the same with the Nikon, and could not see any difference. As a matter of fact, I found that the old DSLR have better ergonomics and better battery life. The new technology or mirrorless only good for new buyers or videos. I'm sure that you won't be blown away by the R5 megapixels.
For my purposes and type of photography my 5D Mk lll still holds up with the best shots from those coking from the from the R mirrorless cameras. I still love seeing the actual optical image rather than an EVF screen.
Upgraded to the R5 from 5DIV last year - the image quality and dynamic range is much better, not to mention the high-res 45Mp images. I wouldn't upgrade to the R6 for landscapes, but I'm very happy with the R5 so far.
R5 Great choice and one I would certainly opt for 👍👍
Great video and like you say it shows that you don’t have to upgrade for the sake of it. You hear so many times “my 3 old year camera is not cutting it any more” but you show that sometimes that’s not the case. So don’t spend money just because you can. Spend it because you need to. This should make the manufacturers think long and hard about releasing new cameras and maybe just maybe make them push the boundaries more.
Very true Gary 👍👍
The image quality is so close, I wouldn't be able to justify the cost.
But the AF would
As a previous owner of the 5diii and current owner of the R6 (5 months or so of ownership) I can say you're dead wrong. If you're happy with the 5diii, definitely keep that, but the R6 blows me away for image quality. Sure it's. 20mp but the low light capabilities and dynamic range are great. the 5diii doesn't come close to touching the R6
I owned the 5d m3 for about 3 years I loved that camera the colors and rendering were amazing. I have the Canon EOS R and R5. I would never go back.
Not for landscapes where the light is fairly even, for sure.
The RAW files actually have a ton more flexibility, I switched up to R6 from 5d3 and noticed right away the color noise in shadows is much less. Its great for being able to push out more details from high contrast scenes, or to recover highlights.
I've only been shooting digital for a few months (not even a year yet) I used to shoot film 20 plus odd years ago and sold all my 35mm film (pentax) gear when I went through a divorce hence the lengthy gap to jumping into digital. As a result of this return to photography and entry into DSLRs I have been watching a load A TOTAL LOAD of UA-cam videos, Vlogs, tutorials, reviews, you name it, and every photographer and reviewer says the same thing. Whether its DP Review TV, or James Popsys, or Nigel Danson, Henry Turner, or our friend here Mr Gough, new gear is great, and new gear is all very well. BUT rarely, if EVER, does anyone say this new gear utterly flattens the preceding model/s. Technology progresses relatively slowly. How technology is MADE after it has been initially produced is pretty rapid, for example computer chips, processor and memory, hard drive capacities, SD cards both in size SD, MiniSD MicroSD etc AND capacities, digital sensors in terms of megapixels. The move forward in terms of increased QUALITY of results achievable it seems rarely if ever justifies laying out hard earned £$ on the latest gear. Not when you cannot tell the difference between the new HYPERCAMERA and the one already in your bag. All the claims in the media for the HUGE LEAPS FORWARD, are measured by machines that can "see" down to miniscule levels, unlike our eyes which only work as they always have relatively poorly. It seems to me we should all keep our £$ in our wallets and only "upgrade" when the gear we are already using starts to creak very noticeably or, falls over dead.
Couldn't have put it better myself. I'm not sure I'm keen on Danosn being placed in the same bracket as me though, that's dissapointing.
@@GaryGough Hi Gary. I'm a big fan of both you and Nigel, so your comment has intrigued me. Do I take it from your comment that you're not a fan of ND???
Professional courtesy prevents me from saying 😁
Great video Gary - although using an f2 lens set at small aperture for landscape is not a useful comparison. Both excellent cameras but for flexibility of different shoots R6 and R5 win hands down
Agree Colin but it was the only lens I had for the R6. Having said that, I shot the scene with an apereture I would normal choose.
I think you would see a difference if you had to push & pull the files!
Some interesting points Gary. Must confess, I don't suppose I'd have emigrated from Canon 5D Mk1 and 600D with the nice 'heavy' set of lenses, to the Olympus OMD gear I'm using now but for the weight advantage. When I'm doing landscape or architecture I still bang the Olympus cameras on a tripod because I find it slows me down and forces me to think about what I'm doing. I still take average shots with the occasional great shot. So the only thing that would get me back to Canon is Olympus sized gear. Let's face it though, almost all modern cameras, of any make, are works of art in themselves. The other thing I would look for is the features of my Olympus that allow me to customise buttons and switches to do what I want without having to think about it when I'm on the hop. Keep up the good work Gary, I've been working my way through your woodland vlogs and can't wait to get out into some forestry areas. 👍👍
Ps. That was 7D not 5D.
Cheers Glen 👍👍
There are plenty of commercial photographers still using the 5D111, and yes, the newer lens is doing the heavy lifting in image quality and will be sharper, I don't think you mentioned at what aperture you were at, but the 24-105 f4 is sharpest at 7.1, also it should be said, only hobbyist photographers pine over ultimate sharpness.
Thanks for this one, Gary! I almost didn't watch as a Canon "R anything" isn't on my present horizon. However, I'm glad I watched anyway. The realistic commentary was quite a refreshing break from the two norms; "gear doesn't matter' and "ya gotta have the latest and greatest" which are both wrong in their own ways!
Cheers Mike 👍👍
Great stuff! If you get another chance to test R6, it would be awesome to see you use the same lens (say 24-105) on both cameras, so it’s more of oranges to oranges comparison.
And yes, R5 for landscapes certainly makes more sense. Excited to see what you’d do with it... although those new cameras often put more demand on computers and we end up forced to upgrade both... ehhh
Thank you. I still shoot a 5D3 and the R5 was a little out of my range. I considered the R6 but I struggled with whether it would be enough of an improvement in tech to compensate for the lower resolution. I print A3+ at home and the 5D3 works perfectly to get me 300 dpi prints. Even with a $2999 28-70 f/2L, the R6 really isn't blowing me away. This video really helped me on that subject. The downloads let me do a detailed comparison in LR and I think I really would have been disappointed. The R6 images are slightly sharper, which is really the result of the glass. Canon really should have made the R6 26-30 megapixels. Thanks again for this video. It was exactly what I needed.
Well R6 has 1dx iii sensor, so you are basically saying 5dm3 is better than 1dx iii.
At this point I am not sure if more mpix's are better for me as I just enjoy being out taking photographs with my 5D mk4. I like the autofocusing systems in the R5 and R6 and that may be the only reason I change for bird photography, but I am waiting for Canon to come out with a their new focusing system in about 30 or 32 mpix. Thank you for comparing the older systems with the newer ones as they are both informative and sensible in the real-world applications. Be safe out there and enjoy....
Cheers Frederick 👍👍
those are some beautiful shots!
Fast action and video are where the latest high-end cameras really shine. Other than that though, and where you can take a bit of time to take a photo, there are thousands of Pro Photographers making a good living on the 5D2, 5D3 and 5D4 (and will continue to do so for another decade I reckon).
A good used 5D3 + the 24-105 f/4 can be had for about £1,000 !!!!! If that isn't bargain of the decade then what is? A tank of a combination that you can take anywhere, in any weather.
I like the honesty, I keep looking to upgrade my system, I’m shooting with a Nikon D7500, but like you can’t find anything that shown a massive improvement in image quality for the right budget.
I upgraded from the 5D MkIII to the EOS R and I’ve been thrilled with its performance. Specifically, when using ND filters. It will autofocus in scenes that the 5D MkIII can’t. The 28-70 is fantastic! Thanks again for your videos.
Great camera eos r love mine
@@hillsrgood1 me too
That 28-70 is one of the best lenses ever created by canon.. or by anyone really.
If you want to be blown away, shoot with the R5. Particularly for people. Why look to be blown away by the second tier? It was so much better than the Mark IV I went ahead and bought 2 of the R5. And for just landscape work, the 5D sr is an inexpensive option. The R5 won't disappoint you.
This is by far the best honest answer. Some might say ahhh... he just doesn't like change. But IF the tool you are using has been giving you the best results and the 'new' tech doesn't improve on it then you don't need to upgrade. The improvements that the new cameras have other than the mirrorless and electronic viewfinder has been in the autofocus, frames per second and video. But if you don't need any of that, there's no reason to upgrade to a system that's not going to improve your photography. If you're zooming to pixel match than that alone should tell you that you're good with what you have. These new cameras are better at portraits and when you're out on the streets firing away and letting the camera focus on your moving subject.
Hey Gary, thanks for the video ... My perspective comes from doing photography as my hobby since the 1960's. Like so many of us, I started out with 35mm film cameras (unless you count my Kodak Brownie when I was really young). A camera is basically a dark box with a lens on one end and a 24mm x 36mm area at the other end where the image is focused, either on film or a sensor. You control the exposure by adjusting the aperture and shutter speed, focus your image, and press the shutter button. The camera lets in the light, and the picture is taken.
When switching between digital cameras, you're just swapping one sensor and processor for another. It's like switching between Panatomic X and Plus X. Sure, the Panatomic X image will be less noisy than the Plus X image ... but in good light, well exposed, who cares?
So I'm not surprised that two full frame cameras in the hands of an experienced landscape photographer will both produce excellent images. Cameras don't create photographs - photographers do. Ansel Adams with a Kodak Brownie will produce better landscapes than a rich hobbyist with the most state-of-the-art equipment. Every time!
BTW, to do a real scientific test, you should remove a variable: use the same 24-105 lens on both cameras (you could have done this with an adapter). Had you made the comparison with the same lens, I don't think anyone but the most obsessive pixel-peeper could have discerned any difference whatsoever.
In my mind, the two best advantages of digital are these: there's no such thing as "wasting film" and you'll never have to deal with dust in the darkroom.
The R6 + 28-70mm was clearly sharper in the tree branches. And I noticed cyan and magenta fringing (chromatic aberration) when you zoomed in to the snow shots (the R6 + 28-70mm had none that I could tell). The beauty of the R5/R6 systems is their autofocus systems, to me, the eye-AF tracking is worth the upgrade price since I shoot mostly dance. I just sold both my 5D3 and 5D4 and I'm upgrading to the R6 and R5.
Just seen this .. and yes, I totally agree. The R6 shots were noticeably cleaner and sharper even on a fairly old TV. The areas of high contrast around those smaller branches were much better handled by the R6 / v expensive 28-70. I am surprised others didn't see that too.
Yes! My R6 replaced my 5d4 and my R5 my 5DS. So happy to NOT have to deal with mirror lockup etc any more (not to mention now having 5 axis IBS).
R5 and an R6... you're just showing off now Martin 😁😁 Cheers 👍👍
Considering buying an R6. Don't you miss the GPS? Is the only inconvenient that I see. Apparently RF lenses are amazing and not compatible with Mark IV
I enjoy your videos Gary! More so that I get a lot of learning from you since I am a landscape enthusiasts on long exposure as well. As long as your gear answers your expectation, stick to it. If money is not an issue, upgrading would only be "gas" perhaps. Still using my D800 and my XT-1, XE2, XE1
80% of photography is by the lens and you are comparing a 1000 dollar lens on 5d iii with a 3000 dollar lens on the R6
My "old" kit was a 5dIII and a 7DII. I wanted more megapixels for deep-detail panorama's, and although I liked the 7DII, I was never thoroughly satisfied with it's image quality (noise and artifacts.) Video is not a priority for me. So I picked up a low shutter count 5DS R and an equally low count 1DX. Combined it they were still less expensive than an R6, and I am thrilled with the results from both.
Try a 5dsr, it really is a noticeable upgrade over the 5d3 and excellent value right now.
I have just bought one. Cheers Graham 👍
I did the same, 5d3 to 5dsr. Look forward to seeing your video on it.
Sony menu's rubbish! I think the menu's for sony were developed by IT people as the menu's in the sony system seemed to make alot more sense to me than my d700- but I think in IT.
The Tokina 16-28 f2.8 works great with the 5D3.
I agree with the assessment! My 5DSr is good for me. I own the 24-70 II, 100-400 II, 17-40, it's a big deal to replace the kit. It's about the shot, not the gear anyway... As you said!
Love your pragmatic advice and approach! 🇭🇲🇭🇲😄😄
Cheers Rob 👍👍
Upgrade is based on need for me - what do you shoot and do you need a new camera? If you don't need to then don't. Save your cash Gary! As a landscaper, on a tripod, you don't need an F2 lens - I would be surprised if you shoot below f5.6 more than 10-15% of the time. Comparing cameras with different lenses is not great - which I know you note. I shoot a range of genres so the R5 suits me, some of which the 5D was not great at - low FPS, lower MP, ISO not fabulous above certain level. For a comparison, your need to stress the 5D3 and see how the new tech compares. Try your Canon 5dMk3 and 24-105 hand held vs the R5/6 and the F2 and see what the differences are then - i.e. use some of the new body's IBIS features. Try the same comparison at night in low light and the R6 will perform much better at high ISO. Of course these examples are not scientific but do test teh features of teh new cameras vs old. If you don't need these features then don't upgrade. Adobe LR still doesn't have colour profiles for the R5/6 files yet either - think it's coming in the next build - end of Feb? Another thing is value of older gear - which has plummeted now anyway. Could have sold older gear at higher prices and makes the bridge to new gear more palatable in the long run. We'll all be dragged along by new tech at some stage as Canon will stop DSLR work, and all cameras will reflect new tech. When that happens it could be very expensive to upgrade - but only if you need to or when older gear breaks, and only if you don't want to buy older lenses again if they suit what you need. At some stage there will be 8k screens, a need for higher resolution video, bigger hard drives on computers for larger file sizes too. We are not far from Peak Camera in my humble opinion anyway - how much further will they go before cameras walk to Malham themselves and take their own photos! :-) Cracking photos as always Gary, enjoyed this one!
I am matching with your opinion. I mostly use a Sony alpha 99 (not the newer alpha 7) and I decided not to upgrade. So I can use all the elder lenses I just have without any problem and the results of my photography is more influenced by the way I am taking pictures (including the mistakes) than by the Camera I use. The second aspect is the budget. So I can get a lot of used equipment for reasonable prices, because it doesn´t fit perfectly with the alpha 7.
Sounds very sensible to me 👍👍
Just looked at the files... I'm so used to the R5 that I can really tell the lack of megapixels in these shots. But the shadow recovery is a ton better on the R6 compared to the 5D3 though.. And that EF 24-105 : horrible Chromatic aberration!
As I commented in the live chat during premiere: the RF 24-105 F4/L is reputedly much better than the EF version. I don't have the latter for comparison, but my RF version is incredible.
@@JohnDrummondPhoto it's definitely better, but I'd take the 24-70 any day of the year.
Man I don't know, but for me 24-105 f/4 L is one of the best lenses ever, be it for photography or video. You get the tight and wide both in a single package. The RF version is a good step up from the EF version.
For what he is doing all he needs is something that can accurately give him what hes seeing, I could tell when he was sharing the images that he wouldnt go with the r6. Nothing wrong with that. Great video Gary, I moved from mark3 to r6, it ended up being a no brainer for me cause I shoot portraits with shakey hands and needed the IBIS (essential tremors). Again well done video lovely imaging.
Just purchased a 5D mk iii myself, upgrading from a canon 650d! Can’t wait to finally utilise full frame
Hi, Gary - come on now! It is not all about the final destination ( the image) A skoda or a Lada will get you to the same destination as a BMW or a Porche. There is tremendous enjoyment to be had driving such cars as indeed in using fine camera gear, that can be so tactile and fulfilling just to admire them for what they are. You can take fine images with an old Lubitel. How long do you expect to live? If you can afford it, I say use the best - you only live once! Bill.
Damn it you’re so right 😁
Interesting review Gary. I'm currently using a Canon 80D and I have been thinking about upgrading. However i have very little interest in video except very occasionally. Thanks for adding clarity.
It's still a great camera and worth adversary to the 80D. FYI I still believe the best camera I ever bought in terms of value for money was my M50. It uses the 80D sensor. It's an excellent all-round camera.
I bought a second hand 80D at the beginning of lockdown as a back up to my 5D mk3 and have thoroughly enjoyed it. Flip screen and weight have been the two key advantages for me but the images are just fine.
IMO, the big differences for landscape photography are the lenses you have used in this good side by side. Both cameras show a similar performance. I sold my 24-150mm y replaced with a 24-0mm II. The IQ difference is important.
On other areas, the R6 wins, e.g. AF system (precission, tracking, sensitivity), and the digital noise in shadows. I have a 5D3 and a 5D4, and the noise is different. On the 5D3 I get color noise while the 5D4 haven't. It's homogeneous, with no color deviations and even pleasing to the eyes. I have been using two 5D3 for product and architecture photo for many years, then my 5D4, which has very nice detail, better dynamic range and more precise colors. Both are very good bodies and I decided not upgrading to the R line untill getting really good rebates in the future.
Thank you so much for your video and I envy that beautiful landscapes.
Cheers from Buenos Aires.
Also looking forward to this. Deciding whether the move or part move to the R system is right for me!
Hi Gary - there was a visible difference to me - even viewing on UA-cam at 1080px quality - notably in the tree branches in your first two comparison images 5d3 vs R6. On the 5d3/24-105f4 there was visible chromatic aberration, and none with the R6/28-70f2. However I noticed you didn't apply a lens profile in ACR - I think if you had used a profile, that difference would have been much less. Same for the CA which was visible in the corners in the snow patches in the following images. Overall, that is of course down to the lens not the camera. In terms of the camera, there was nothing to choose. You didn't comment on resolution, which for the R6 (20MP) vs 5d3 (22.1MP) is negligible. For a 5D4 owner, the difference would be more noticeable, though mostly only in very large prints. I have more than one A2 print from my (previous) 5D2 and similar size prints from my 5D4 are hardly any "better" in terms of resolution, though viewed at 100% on screen there is a clear difference - and this is where people are misled by chasing ever higher pixel counts, it simply doesn't matter as much as you think in the final printed image. I wanted to try a mirrorless Canon but thought the two new models too expensive, so bought an R body, to use alongside my 5d4. I would say it is very slightly better in terms of IQ despite having the same sensor, perhaps its the processor. I'm using the same lenses. But overall no real difference in results - I do like the lower weight, the handling, and the articulated screen, but I'm in two minds over the viewfinder (better in low light, less good in bright light). Time will tell, it wasn't a big purchase (winter cashback), and I can use all my EF lenses and existing batteries!
The EOS R is a cracking bit of kit, a wise choice. Cheers 👍👍
I still shoot with the first 5D that came out. I do portraits and am stuck deciding the 5D mark 4 or the new r6.
Thanks so much for this video Gary, unlike yourself I have the Canon EOS 800D 24 MP crop sensor, I am pushing it now beyond it's limitations and considered the R6, coming from a crop sensor with older processor I think this camera will make my images better. Cheers Brian 👍
The R6 is a cracking camera, you won't be disappointed 👍👍
I have a couple of 5D Mk 111's and I have just bought an R6 with the RF 24-105mm L lens.
As you mentioned it is a question of how the camera meets your needs.
For me photographing people I am finding I am getting a higher hit rate where there is movement a client did make a very positive comment on my first job with the new camera which I put down to the fast focusing and a wider variety of usable images.
I really do love my 5D Mk111's and only bought the R6 as I have shot so many frames with one of the 5D Mk 111 bodies.
I am definitely enjoying it and can see the value it has already brought but if I was just shooting landscapes I would totally agree with you.
Maybe what you need to be blown away is higher resolution ?
I look forward to your R5 comparison !
Cheers Bill 👍👍
If I was making my money out of landscape photography my only current options would be the 61mp sensors in the Sony A7R4 and Sigma Fp-L and of course the 100 mp Fuji medium format...although the Fuji has a very limited lens selection
Great choices :)
Got the R5 in July and absolutley love the flexibility of it. The AF is astonishing and the Dynamic range is a massive surprise for me when I shot a few sunrises in October using the RF 70-200MM F2.8L.
Its a bit more money but I think worth it.
Jealous as hell :)
That video helped me a lot. I own the 1D X, which is very much just a 5D Mark III with a little lower resolution, a higher frame rate and an larger body. My focus are architecture shots and now I am confident that my old 1D X can still compete. Of course when it comes to moving subjects, the R6 blows my camera away.
You can change the eye ball but if they all look through the bottom of the same whiskey bottle...of course it will look similar...... it's not the body...it's the sharpness of the RF lens in question. I can pull better dynamic rage from R6.....and superior low light and night photography....... but you landscape boys can use a box camera with film.
lol I shoot Portraits and commercial in the studio and weddings too so I have to agree with you 100%. I just wanted to make a comparison as a Landscape Photographer though 😁😁
I totally agree! It's not about the specs. I still and will forever have my 7D Mark II. Which to to me giving it up, or so called upgrading would be like cutting off my right hand.
Can't imagine taking photos using anything else! Im new in taking videos but can u please suggest the best Memory Card to use for taking videos using this camera without losing frames and ensuring HD Videos? If anyone can help me with this...
Hi Jennifer, just stick with a company like SanDisk. They're very good and reasonably priced. If you intend to film in 4K make sure the card is fast enough to read/write it. It'll say it in the card specs.
If I may suggest, you should REPEAT your test and take the pictures when the sun has just set. Nobody is saying the R6 has superior sharpness. However, they ARE saying the dynamic range in low light is superior.
Dynamic range can be created but using multi-exposures. I know what you're saying though 😁😁 👍👍
Still using a T5i for paid work, but needed to upgrade to a better camera for more advanced work. Have an A7iii and A7siii with Tamron and GM glass...
Am sure the R6 is a wonderful camera, my 5d3 which I bought 6 years ago cost me £2300 I can now buy one off eBay for £600 that's an incredible amount of depreciation.
Cameras always depreciate a lot that's why I always tell people to invest more in their glass.
5d MK3 is a vintage Porsche vs the modern ones, more joy to use..
Hi Gary, if you are wildlife/sports or even a video shooter then the R6 is a massive upgrade to the canon 5d mkiii, but for landscape maybe not, try the R5 then hold on to your socks !!!!!!!!!
Agree 100% with all of that Paul 👍👍
Stick with the 5d and invest in filters...
My channel is sponsored by a filter company (NiSi) so I'm in good hands. Great advice though.
Thankyou Gary. My 10 year old camera gives quality results to challenge my newer stuff. In fact just the other day i was marvelling at pictures from an old G1 ( yes, a sunny day ).
I don't think the mirrorless will ever be as robust as a DSLR. the 5D is a bomb proof tank and will not waste money changing . oh I'm a Yorkshire man lol. I'm blown away with the 9 year old 5D and will use mine till it dies.
A man after my own heart 😁 Cheers Daz 👍👍
Having done this camera upgrade I wouldn't have bothered for landscapes. I only upgraded for the eye tracking AF as I shoot low depth of field with primes. The 5Diii also feels like a tank.
what about dynamic range, does that play a role for you?
Thank you for restoring my faith in my canon 5d mark iii, been feel alot of pressure to upgrade. I only take landscape photographs with the occasional couple shoots. So thank you for just making me feel confident in my equipment x
I started using film at age 5 back in the 80's. In 2008 I got a Nikon D90. In 2015 I swapped that for an Olympus EM1. I also bought a Sony RX100 III. Then I swapped the Olympus for a Canon EOS 80D. Then I swapped that for a 5D Mk IV. In all that time, not once has the camera made the difference - it's always about you and the light.
The only big difference you get with more megapixels is the ability to crop more, or print huge. Do you print huge? New sensors have a bit more dynamic range (perhaps), but so what, you work with what you've got, and can always bracket if dynamic range is a problem.
The one feature I would like from the R series is automatic eye tracking for family shots.
Anyway, the point is, enjoy what you've got and only upgrade if you can personally identify how your current gear is getting in your way. Remember, blogs and review websites and manufacturers are a symbiotic ecosystem, designed to part you from your cash.
I've enjoyed watching this again. I have a bit of a dilemma I'm upgrading from my 700d to a canon eos r or a r6. Just can't decide.. any advise at all.?
That's a toughie! They're both excellent cameras. There is very little difference between them but the "R" is much cheaper. You could buy the "R" and put the money saved towards a lens maybe?
Gary, how about the Fujifilm medium format GFX 100s? Fujifilm has amazing colours and medium format should be a big step up from the 5D markiii. Also, Fujifilm’s menu is very user friendly.
Great video Gary. Just goes to show , if it ain’t broke , don’t fix it! I use a Fujifilm X-T2 and I’m really pleased with the results I get and yet I’ve still got one eye on the X-T4 for some reason!
Speaking as a fellow 5D Mk iii owner, i totally agree and think for a landscape photographer, sticking with the 5D Mk iii is a no brainier. For a wild life photographer however or someone wanting to also shoot wildlife, especially birds in flight then the R5 or R6 is an entirely different proposition.
A lot of the modern features are not required for landscape photography, as long as you have decent dynamic range. Most advancements have been in autofocus tracking and accuracy etc.
I am with you on this one. I have a 5Dmark ii and looked for R5, but honestly the super high price for a slightly improvement in the photography I don't think it worth the money. I did buy a Nikon P1000 for the zoom capability (24 - 3000 optical zoom). Photo wise Nikon P1000 is bad. but video is a different story. besides I have the ability to film the craters on the moon:). So why do I need an R5 or R6 for? Besides the new 1D dropped back to 24Mp. As you mentioned, I expected the new technology to blow me away... It didn't. I was rather impressed by my iPhone shots and movies technology, since the lenses are so small yet they can produce fair quality images.
I wish this was a bit more scientific. Hard to see differences between the sensors if you're not using the same lens on both cameras. Still, as a 5DIII owner I believe it's just as good as the R6 as far as IQ
The 5D3 was not stressed in the scenario filmed. Get the 5D3 hand held in low light and then compare it to the R6 with IBIS and superior high level ISO capability , then you'll see material differences. However, if you don't need these features (there are many others - around AF, ServoAF, oversampled video etc), its pointless upgrading would be my view. I hate carting a big tripod around, so I do hand held pano's even in low light, and can focus stack with the R5 in camera - are just a small selection of improvements and changes to process flows (camera takes series of photos to execute sharpness from front to back on its own, but image stack still needs processing in post though). There are loads of differences these new bodies provide, but it seems not many of them are that important to Gary and his needs/process which is fair enough. Only upgrade if you have a need to!
Thanks for the comparison of the two. Can’t wait to be able to get back out myself.
How much of the slight image quality improvement with the R6 was down to the £2000 lens?
Would have been interesting to use the older lens on both of these bodies
I now have the R6. It is indeed a much sharper rendering camera. The details it pulls from my old lenses is fantastic
I have both these cameras, I can tell you for an absolute certainty that the R6 is a by far much more superior camera! The the dynamic range of the R6 absolutely smokes the 5D iii… I also have the eos R which is basically the 5D 4 but much more improved! The glass can only take you so far, eventually the camera has to pull its weight! And the R6 is an incredible tool to use 🙏🙌
@@marcusgregoryrichardson22 My point wasn’t to question the quality of the R6 over the 5D but the lenses used on the R6 with the adapter
@@cerec69 You said “how much of a slight image quality improvement”… I said there is a slight improvement, they are levels apart! Like I also said the lens you use can only get you so far! Sharpness, colour rendition and contrast yes it varies from lens to lens .. But dynamic range and performance do not! It’s as incredible with old EF lenses as it’s is RF! So like I said, the lens isn’t the overall factor and neither is there a “slight image quality improvement” … the cameras is a vastly more superior camera and this review of it is miss leading, Gary only uses it in a certain way! You can get so much more out of the camera if you know how to use it!
The real differences between them is how you get the photo, the af and low light capabilities and other refinements of the r6 mean getting the shot vs not. Landscapes? My box brownie can still do those as well as any.
Your old brownie, that's the point I was making. Manufacturers aim cameras at photographers stating that the new tech is so much better than the old tech, but how much of that is true?
slight clarity and contrast but not enough i agree . MK lll shooter
Hi Gary
Great video comparing old tech to new tech. Im in agreement that with your examples shown i would most certainly keep the Canon 5diii. The R6 looked 1% better image for thousands of pounds investment. If you didn't have side by side comparison nobody would have a bloomin clue.
When I look back at my old Canon 7d mk 1 images I'm still impressed with them. In fact after watching this im going to grab it, with the original 18-200, and go and shoot some stuff on my afternoon walk. 🙂👍👍
The reason I came here was that I'm edging towards buying a second hand 5diii .... its now looking very favourable. 🙂👍👍
Cheers Gary
Kind regards..... Steve.
Cheers Steve. I have recently compared the my 5D3 to the Canon 5DRs. The video comes out next week. Watch the video before you make a purchase ;)
@@GaryGough cheers for the heads up Gary. Will do 🙂👍
Just picked up a 5dMiii for $500 AUD Posted. Excited it to get this week! :D My first full frame.
Cracking camera and excellent value for money 👍👍
Thumbs up, Gary! My favourite part was the “making of” the thumb nail 😮
Excellent honest video... I’d have saved a lot of money if I had that outlook... being much more inexperienced that yourself... I’ve gone with the reviews, which tend to be costly
Cheers Ian, glad it was helpful!