Hi Brant, I totally agree with you regarding and using crop mode on the R5 and 100-500. I crop when needed with that scenario and it works great for me. I am glad that you 'open your mind' to that scenario. One your your previous video was a rant about using crop mode (R5 + RF 100-500) vs R5 + RF 800. The crop mode of the R5 is just that good when lighting conditions are good. I have been using this scenario ((R5 + RF 100-500) + 1.6 Crop mode)) for years with very good results if lighting is good. I shoot manual all the time and I am rarely disappointed. Have a good day Brent !
I have been watching you here for a few years now, and have to say that I love watching. I've come to the conclusion that you're my "Bob Ross of photography". You have beautiful art, interesting information, and that calm, smooth voice that is so nice to listen to. I enjoy most everything you put out, even though I'll probably never have a great camera or amazing editing software. Keep up the great work, and thanks so much for all the effort you put into each and every video.
The big glass (400 mm+; I use a 400mm f2.8 plus 2x convertor) is a must for Yellowstone, but I also have a second body with a 28-300mm or 70-200mm lens attached and in arm's reach while driving. You never know what is right around the corner, at the edge of the road, or at the tree line something pops out. I can grab the camera and take shots from the vehicle if needed. I had an eagle land on a road kill along the road before me. I was able to slow down, pull off the road, I had and lean out to grab a few shots before it took off. I had a grizzly running perpendicular to the road before me. Again, I was able to pull over, get out of the car and take several shots. There was no time to pull the big glass out and set it up.
I totally agree on the 8MP cropping with the R5. However, I bought the R7 and for the most part use that, especially for small songbirds 20 feet away or more. Topaz Photo AI enhance looks good, but having more MP on the original image is more desirable. In southern New England, where I live, many of the birds just don't want to come close to you. This weekend I had three bobolinks within 10 feet of me and that was a rare treat and I didn't even need the R7, though I was using it at the time. I am getting to the point that unless it's a new bird, or a bird I am familiar with doing something interesting, I won't bother taking a photo if it's too far away.
Some great advice! I’m tempted too by the R8, I think it will compliment my R7 great when I dable with astro and landscape. Will certainly keep me for spending more on bodies I don’t need R5/3/6ii). Just have a few spare batteries and it’s good to go
I have the R7 and the R8. I enjoy both cameras and the autofocus on the R8 is stickier and with no pulsing. It also does not create distortions nearly as much with hummingbird wings or bees wings. Almost no distortions even with electronic shutter at certain shutter speeds. Thanks for all of your information and entertaining and knowledgeable videos!
5:00 - Agreed. The R6 Mark II is THE best Canon camera you can get for the price... and yet it's also the most underrated. I hear VERY little about that camera compared to the R5, or even the R8. DXOmark refused to do a sensor review of the R6 II and yet had one for the R8 within weeks of release. Even the big name Canon influencers didn't do any real reviews (just previews and nothing more). Sensor resolution is overrated. I've compared the R6 II to the R5 by upscaling the R6 II files and rarely can see any difference even zoomed to 100%. The very, very rare times I need more resolution, I just use the ACR Super Resolution feature (and the R6 II files actually look shaper than the R5 native files at 45 MP). But I've printed billboards with 8MP 1D2N files that looked amazing. Same also applies to cropping (though I never crop unless I just have to reframe the ratio which is almost insignificant and then I just use AI to upscale or fill in corners).
It is surprising that it's not being talked about as much. I love mine. I wonder if it's because it's just right in the middle, price-wise. Seems like a lot of people are either looking at all the more budget-friendly stuff, or want to go straight to the R5/R3. Idk.
Hi Brent, this is a very helpful video, thanks a lot :) ! What I found the most relatable was when you mentioned that the R5 with the R6II autofocus would be a dream camera. Perhaps that's what the R5II will be, if and when it comes out. As someone who loves bird photography, I am currently in a dilemma between the two, where the R5 would give me the extra reach using crop mode (due to its higher MP), whereas the R6II will give me the amazing autofocus. For any other photography that I do for fun (portraits, night skies and streets), I expect them to be similar. Funnily, I was initially set on the R5, but your video about the R6II and its autofocus capabilities and the ability to crop a decent bit for 24MP is what made me a bit confused :P . There have been instances where the price of the R5 has not been too far from that of the R6II+1.4x converter (about a 500 euros difference). I think I already know your answer, but allow me to still ask you this. If you had to pick one body with the 100-500, would you pick the R6II over the R5?
You did with the R7 what i did with the RP as i was interested towards wildlife and (slowmo) video. Funnily enough the R7 replaced my RP. I cant be happier now with the R7. At first i though i miss the full frame sensor a lot especially with the Rf 50 1.8, and i really miss it, but by far not as much. Just the R7s IBIS is awesome and drastically improve the performance of my lenses without stabilizer, especially vintage glass like the SMC Takumar 50 1.4 or my Sigma 50mm 2.8 Macro are incredible stable. I wished i would be able to keep the RP as well, but the different battery and the fact the RP was exclusively used on the telescope anymore and very rarely made the decision easier since it was obvious that something better will be released and prices drop further.
If I can use crop mode on R5 and get better autofocus response thats a winner for me. I shoot really small Warblers mostly, so I crop a lot and picture quality is not an issue.
I spent a month in the Yellowstone eco in May-June. I primarily take photos with my R5 and RF100-500mm. My girlfriend used her R7 and my RF 800mm F11 for wildlife videography on her youtube channel which recently became monetized. Very proud of her for that! The videos she took were outstanding compared to mine purely bc of the reach she had. I had an R7 at release and returned it being slightly unsatisfied in comparison with my R5. Obviously not really a fair match up but I guess I wasn't forward thinking. Kind of regret that now as I should have kept it as a second body for Yellowstone if nowhere else...
That's awesome, congrats to her for that! And yeah, I sold my R7 too, and kind of wish I could have kept it for certain situations. Though it was frustrating for me personally, I didn't hate it, and when it was good it was really good! It just made more business sense for me to let it go and put the money back into the business for other things.
Great info! I added a R5 to my bag late last year, along with a 7dmk2 and 5dmk4. I'll be getting those out of my bag at some point and adding an R3. Long term goal to add the RF100-300 for the bulk of shooting I do, until then my 100-400 and 70-200 will suffice.
Your first person asking you the question about his camera body options... he should consider the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary or the Sport, which is far more rugged, or even the Sigma 60-600mm, as that focal range would likely cover everything he needs for wildlife in one lens. You should try renting one for one of your videos just to check it out unless you want to exclusively stay canon?
I have a Sigma 150-600c tbh ..buy something far better .. Don't get me wrong use it more for Aviation , Ships boats it will do a job . But birds a struggles more often
Well he mentioned the Tamron 150-600 G2, but he also mentioned the RF1-5, which IMHO is a far better lens for any Canon RF mount. The AF and IQ are just way better (plus the weight dif). Yes it's shorter on the long end and WAY more expensive, but if it's ever an option for someone, I'd definitely steer them that way rather than having to deal with the inconsistencies of the 3rd party AF systems and the added weight of any of the 150-600s vs the 1-5. Just my two cents though, from having used the 150-600s before.
This was very helpful - thank you for taking the time to walk through the different options that are out there. Agree that the R6ii is a killer setup. I have also analyzed myself into the same conclusion you have - the R8 with the better focus system/newer sensor is a better camera than the R6 (I'll just deal with the different batteries...). Barring some killer deal on a clean R6, I'm shopping for the R8. I'll likely put the 800 on the R5 and run the 70-200 on the R8, throw the 17-40 on the M50 to be a camcorder and enjoy whatever I'm blessed to see. Now to overanalyze where/how to shoot the night sky with the EF 24 1.4...
I have an R7 and the RF100-500, I am considering upgrading to full frame , a second hand R5. or R5.2 but budget is a big issue, and I will miss the reach of the R7.
You will ALWAYS miss the reach, lol. It's our biggest problem as wildlife photographers. If you're thinking about moving to full frame, then there's probably some limits with the R7 that you find frustrating or are just ready to move past in general, so I'd say just think about what exactly the full frame could do that you the R7 can't and see if those things are worth whatever price tag you're looking at for the new camera. If you're wanting to branch out and do more landscape, low light, astro, that sort of thing, then moving to a full frame will definitely be nice.
I've seen a few 5D SR 50mp camera appear on the 2nd hand market . Tbh am kinda tempted to make the kill on one . Mind you it's still bizarre how the current 5D still commands 2,600 price tag . Though i do wish i could afford a EF600 or 500 even the 2nd hd prices is still out of my financial reach
So many youtubers are pushing mirrorless. As I mentioned other post I have two of the best canon cameras not including 1DS mk2. I do not video record. Would you say there is no need to upgrade?
I mean, the only need to upgrade will come from you, and whether or not you feel you're pushing your current gear past it's limits. If you're still happy with what you have then there's certainly no need to upgrade. Also, it's not just UA-camrs that are pushing mirrorless, it's the entire industry. It's just the way technology has moved and dslrs are being phased out by companies now. After having mirrorless for the past few years, I personally, would never go back to or even look at a dslr, but that's personal preference based on my experience and creative needs. So, I'm not really "pushing" anyone to only consider mirrorless from here on out, I'm just recommending what I know and giving advise on current and future gear trends. I would never tell anyone they shouldn't use a dslr just because mirrorless is the new thing. I tell people to use whatever they either have or can afford, and if that happens to be a dslr then use it as much as possible, because getting out there and using what you have is the ultimate most important thing to start and progress.
@BrentHall photography wise. If Nat geo is accepting submissions taken on film and dslrs ,people hire photogs shooting dslr, why is there a need to upgrade?
My wife is using my old 90D with a Tamron 17-400 and just cannot get sharp shots. She wants things to be simple, so the huge range of this lens is great, as she shoots a lit of landscape as well and close ups. Not sure what to do. Budget isca big consideration.
That's tough. The 90D may be a bit long in the tooth, but it's still certainly a capable camera. The Tamron on the other hand, while being highly versatile with that focal range, is notoriously soft, especially at the long end. Also the 90D has a fairly high pixel density, which can often be a culprit in soft images. You might find yourself needing a much higher shutter speed than normal with higher pixel density sensors. Combine that with a softer lens and that might be some of your image quality problems. Hard to say for sure without being there in person though, you know.
I was really disappointed with the lens... It sounded brilliant but reality bites... The big trouble is she is not interested in swapping lenses around.. I have a 24-195 L lens she could use close up. a 70-200L and a Sigma 150-600C ( way too heavy for her) ..
I have an R10 with RF 100-400. It’s a very light and capable combo. I also have R5 with 100-500, the R10 is a bit like a mini R5. Image quality is very good.
I shoot at Yellowstone every year. my cameras are r5 and the R6. Let me tell you the R6 is a work horse and you cannot go wrong with that body. You will be happy with both.
Oh nice, it's such a great place for photography! I wish I could go there every year, at least once per season would be awesome. And yeah, the R6 is still a great camera, for sure!
If the guy can afford an R5 and RF800 he most likely can afford an R6M2. I have the R6M2 and I love this camera. By far the best camera I have ever owned. 40 frames per second in electronic mode. I have shot in high ISO and as long as you shoot in good light, every little noise even when I crop heavily.
I definitely agree that the R6II is incredible! I love mine, but presuming someone else's finances based on previous purchases might not be the best assumption. :)
The R6 is currently on sale at B&H for $1999. It's a steal at that price. The AF struggles in low light, though. Forget the Tamron 150-600 G2. Its VC isn't compatible with Canon's IBIS. So, video footage is very jerky and basically unusable. If the RF 100-500 is too dear, the RF 100-400 with teleconverter should do nicely.
Using crop mode on R5??!! Right on Brent ! I do the same and have much success. Glad you mentioned it. Thx.
Hi Brant, I totally agree with you regarding and using crop mode on the R5 and 100-500. I crop when needed with that scenario and it works great for me. I am glad that you 'open your mind' to that scenario. One your your previous video was a rant about using crop mode (R5 + RF 100-500) vs R5 + RF 800. The crop mode of the R5 is just that good when lighting conditions are good. I have been using this scenario ((R5 + RF 100-500) + 1.6 Crop mode)) for years with very good results if lighting is good. I shoot manual all the time and I am rarely disappointed. Have a good day Brent !
I have been watching you here for a few years now, and have to say that I love watching. I've come to the conclusion that you're my "Bob Ross of photography". You have beautiful art, interesting information, and that calm, smooth voice that is so nice to listen to. I enjoy most everything you put out, even though I'll probably never have a great camera or amazing editing software. Keep up the great work, and thanks so much for all the effort you put into each and every video.
Hey thanks man, that really means a lot!
The big glass (400 mm+; I use a 400mm f2.8 plus 2x convertor) is a must for Yellowstone, but I also have a second body with a 28-300mm or 70-200mm lens attached and in arm's reach while driving. You never know what is right around the corner, at the edge of the road, or at the tree line something pops out. I can grab the camera and take shots from the vehicle if needed. I had an eagle land on a road kill along the road before me. I was able to slow down, pull off the road, I had and lean out to grab a few shots before it took off. I had a grizzly running perpendicular to the road before me. Again, I was able to pull over, get out of the car and take several shots. There was no time to pull the big glass out and set it up.
I totally agree on the 8MP cropping with the R5. However, I bought the R7 and for the most part use that, especially for small songbirds 20 feet away or more. Topaz Photo AI enhance looks good, but having more MP on the original image is more desirable. In southern New England, where I live, many of the birds just don't want to come close to you. This weekend I had three bobolinks within 10 feet of me and that was a rare treat and I didn't even need the R7, though I was using it at the time. I am getting to the point that unless it's a new bird, or a bird I am familiar with doing something interesting, I won't bother taking a photo if it's too far away.
Yeah, I would have liked to keep my R7 for that as well. It definitely helps for small birds.
Some great advice! I’m tempted too by the R8, I think it will compliment my R7 great when I dable with astro and landscape. Will certainly keep me for spending more on bodies I don’t need R5/3/6ii). Just have a few spare batteries and it’s good to go
I think the R8 would go very well with your R7!
I have the R7 and the R8. I enjoy both cameras and the autofocus on the R8 is stickier and with no pulsing. It also does not create distortions nearly as much with hummingbird wings or bees wings. Almost no distortions even with electronic shutter at certain shutter speeds. Thanks for all of your information and entertaining and knowledgeable videos!
That's a nice combo! I've been highly tempted to pick up an R8 lately, for travel, vlogging, backup up stuff. I think it would be perfect.
5:00 - Agreed. The R6 Mark II is THE best Canon camera you can get for the price... and yet it's also the most underrated. I hear VERY little about that camera compared to the R5, or even the R8. DXOmark refused to do a sensor review of the R6 II and yet had one for the R8 within weeks of release. Even the big name Canon influencers didn't do any real reviews (just previews and nothing more).
Sensor resolution is overrated. I've compared the R6 II to the R5 by upscaling the R6 II files and rarely can see any difference even zoomed to 100%. The very, very rare times I need more resolution, I just use the ACR Super Resolution feature (and the R6 II files actually look shaper than the R5 native files at 45 MP). But I've printed billboards with 8MP 1D2N files that looked amazing. Same also applies to cropping (though I never crop unless I just have to reframe the ratio which is almost insignificant and then I just use AI to upscale or fill in corners).
It is surprising that it's not being talked about as much. I love mine. I wonder if it's because it's just right in the middle, price-wise. Seems like a lot of people are either looking at all the more budget-friendly stuff, or want to go straight to the R5/R3. Idk.
I too crop when I have shot in crop mode on my R5. Crop mode is close to my beloved 7D2. Love the 45MP!
Thank you. This type of informative video, I think you are very good at. (Sorry about a comment awhile ago questioning "Time=lapse photo's.) Alex
Thanks Alex, I'm you liked the video, and don't ever be sorry for asking questions.
Thank you so much for the more detailed reply. :)
Hi Brent, this is a very helpful video, thanks a lot :) !
What I found the most relatable was when you mentioned that the R5 with the R6II autofocus would be a dream camera. Perhaps that's what the R5II will be, if and when it comes out.
As someone who loves bird photography, I am currently in a dilemma between the two, where the R5 would give me the extra reach using crop mode (due to its higher MP), whereas the R6II will give me the amazing autofocus. For any other photography that I do for fun (portraits, night skies and streets), I expect them to be similar.
Funnily, I was initially set on the R5, but your video about the R6II and its autofocus capabilities and the ability to crop a decent bit for 24MP is what made me a bit confused :P .
There have been instances where the price of the R5 has not been too far from that of the R6II+1.4x converter (about a 500 euros difference). I think I already know your answer, but allow me to still ask you this. If you had to pick one body with the 100-500, would you pick the R6II over the R5?
You did with the R7 what i did with the RP as i was interested towards wildlife and (slowmo) video.
Funnily enough the R7 replaced my RP.
I cant be happier now with the R7. At first i though i miss the full frame sensor a lot especially with the Rf 50 1.8, and i really miss it, but by far not as much.
Just the R7s IBIS is awesome and drastically improve the performance of my lenses without stabilizer, especially vintage glass like the SMC Takumar 50 1.4 or my Sigma 50mm 2.8 Macro are incredible stable.
I wished i would be able to keep the RP as well, but the different battery and the fact the RP was exclusively used on the telescope anymore and very rarely made the decision easier since it was obvious that something better will be released and prices drop further.
If I can use crop mode on R5 and get better autofocus response thats a winner for me. I shoot really small Warblers mostly, so I crop a lot and picture quality is not an issue.
I spent a month in the Yellowstone eco in May-June. I primarily take photos with my R5 and RF100-500mm. My girlfriend used her R7 and my RF 800mm F11 for wildlife videography on her youtube channel which recently became monetized. Very proud of her for that! The videos she took were outstanding compared to mine purely bc of the reach she had. I had an R7 at release and returned it being slightly unsatisfied in comparison with my R5. Obviously not really a fair match up but I guess I wasn't forward thinking. Kind of regret that now as I should have kept it as a second body for Yellowstone if nowhere else...
That's awesome, congrats to her for that! And yeah, I sold my R7 too, and kind of wish I could have kept it for certain situations. Though it was frustrating for me personally, I didn't hate it, and when it was good it was really good! It just made more business sense for me to let it go and put the money back into the business for other things.
Great info! I added a R5 to my bag late last year, along with a 7dmk2 and 5dmk4. I'll be getting those out of my bag at some point and adding an R3. Long term goal to add the RF100-300 for the bulk of shooting I do, until then my 100-400 and 70-200 will suffice.
that RF 1-3 would be awesome for low light and big wildlife for sure!
Wow, I use a 7D MK2 and a 70-300L. IF I need, I put my 150-600 Sigma on 7D. If I think I might crop I pull out 5D MK4.
Your first person asking you the question about his camera body options... he should consider the Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary or the Sport, which is far more rugged, or even the Sigma 60-600mm, as that focal range would likely cover everything he needs for wildlife in one lens. You should try renting one for one of your videos just to check it out unless you want to exclusively stay canon?
I have a Sigma 150-600c tbh ..buy something far better ..
Don't get me wrong use it more for Aviation , Ships boats it will do a job . But birds a struggles more often
Well he mentioned the Tamron 150-600 G2, but he also mentioned the RF1-5, which IMHO is a far better lens for any Canon RF mount. The AF and IQ are just way better (plus the weight dif). Yes it's shorter on the long end and WAY more expensive, but if it's ever an option for someone, I'd definitely steer them that way rather than having to deal with the inconsistencies of the 3rd party AF systems and the added weight of any of the 150-600s vs the 1-5. Just my two cents though, from having used the 150-600s before.
This was very helpful - thank you for taking the time to walk through the different options that are out there. Agree that the R6ii is a killer setup. I have also analyzed myself into the same conclusion you have - the R8 with the better focus system/newer sensor is a better camera than the R6 (I'll just deal with the different batteries...). Barring some killer deal on a clean R6, I'm shopping for the R8. I'll likely put the 800 on the R5 and run the 70-200 on the R8, throw the 17-40 on the M50 to be a camcorder and enjoy whatever I'm blessed to see. Now to overanalyze where/how to shoot the night sky with the EF 24 1.4...
Thanks man, I'm glad it helped! Yeah, I didn't know the R6 was still going for $2K, which definitely makes the R8 more attractive IMO.
@@BrentHall I'm not in the new market on an R6 - secondary for sure from MPB. If I was shopping new, it is a no-brainer R8 for the budget solution.
I have an R7 and the RF100-500, I am considering upgrading to full frame , a second hand R5. or R5.2 but budget is a big issue, and I will miss the reach of the R7.
You will ALWAYS miss the reach, lol. It's our biggest problem as wildlife photographers. If you're thinking about moving to full frame, then there's probably some limits with the R7 that you find frustrating or are just ready to move past in general, so I'd say just think about what exactly the full frame could do that you the R7 can't and see if those things are worth whatever price tag you're looking at for the new camera. If you're wanting to branch out and do more landscape, low light, astro, that sort of thing, then moving to a full frame will definitely be nice.
I've seen a few 5D SR 50mp camera appear on the 2nd hand market . Tbh am kinda tempted to make the kill on one .
Mind you it's still bizarre how the current 5D still commands 2,600 price tag . Though i do wish i could afford a EF600 or 500 even the 2nd hd prices is still out of my financial reach
Yeah, I still want a 500 f4 mk ii. Still can't afford even that yet though, lol. Maybe someday.
smile man smiiiiiiillle
So many youtubers are pushing mirrorless. As I mentioned other post I have two of the best canon cameras not including 1DS mk2. I do not video record. Would you say there is no need to upgrade?
I mean, the only need to upgrade will come from you, and whether or not you feel you're pushing your current gear past it's limits. If you're still happy with what you have then there's certainly no need to upgrade.
Also, it's not just UA-camrs that are pushing mirrorless, it's the entire industry. It's just the way technology has moved and dslrs are being phased out by companies now.
After having mirrorless for the past few years, I personally, would never go back to or even look at a dslr, but that's personal preference based on my experience and creative needs.
So, I'm not really "pushing" anyone to only consider mirrorless from here on out, I'm just recommending what I know and giving advise on current and future gear trends. I would never tell anyone they shouldn't use a dslr just because mirrorless is the new thing. I tell people to use whatever they either have or can afford, and if that happens to be a dslr then use it as much as possible, because getting out there and using what you have is the ultimate most important thing to start and progress.
@BrentHall photography wise. If Nat geo is accepting submissions taken on film and dslrs ,people hire photogs shooting dslr, why is there a need to upgrade?
My wife is using my old 90D with a Tamron 17-400 and just cannot get sharp shots.
She wants things to be simple, so the huge range of this lens is great, as she shoots a lit of landscape as well and close ups. Not sure what to do. Budget isca big consideration.
That's tough. The 90D may be a bit long in the tooth, but it's still certainly a capable camera. The Tamron on the other hand, while being highly versatile with that focal range, is notoriously soft, especially at the long end. Also the 90D has a fairly high pixel density, which can often be a culprit in soft images. You might find yourself needing a much higher shutter speed than normal with higher pixel density sensors. Combine that with a softer lens and that might be some of your image quality problems. Hard to say for sure without being there in person though, you know.
I was really disappointed with the lens... It sounded brilliant but reality bites... The big trouble is she is not interested in swapping lenses around.. I have a 24-195 L lens she could use close up. a 70-200L and a Sigma 150-600C ( way too heavy for her) ..
I have an R10 with RF 100-400. It’s a very light and capable combo. I also have R5 with 100-500, the R10 is a bit like a mini R5. Image quality is very good.
I shoot at Yellowstone every year. my cameras are r5 and the R6. Let me tell you the R6 is a work horse and you cannot go wrong with that body. You will be happy with both.
Oh nice, it's such a great place for photography! I wish I could go there every year, at least once per season would be awesome. And yeah, the R6 is still a great camera, for sure!
If the guy can afford an R5 and RF800 he most likely can afford an R6M2. I have the R6M2 and I love this camera. By far the best camera I have ever owned. 40 frames per second in electronic mode. I have shot in high ISO and as long as you shoot in good light, every little noise even when I crop heavily.
I definitely agree that the R6II is incredible! I love mine, but presuming someone else's finances based on previous purchases might not be the best assumption. :)
The R6 is currently on sale at B&H for $1999. It's a steal at that price. The AF struggles in low light, though.
Forget the Tamron 150-600 G2. Its VC isn't compatible with Canon's IBIS. So, video footage is very jerky and basically unusable. If the RF 100-500 is too dear, the RF 100-400 with teleconverter should do nicely.
Oh wow, I didn't know the R6 was still going for that much!
Like