I'm still thinking of buying the R5 mark II. Should I or should I wait? I BOUGHT IT!!!

[Levina de Ruijter]

yup, the 300 is nice. I often use my EF 70-200 f/2.8 in low light but really only good in the garden where I am on top of the birds

Yeah, my 300 is only good for big birds when I'm out. Or tame ducks. Shot this one at dawn in the park.

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

Just another little test. There are always gulls on this roof. It's across the canal from where I live and it's a distance away. I decided to shoot a few coming in and then see how much I could crop. Well, here are two results. I ran them through DXO Pure Raw and then cropped and edited them a bit in Lightroom. So I never took them to Photoshop. Sharpening must be minimal.

This one was cropped to a little over 1600px

And this one was cropped to less than 1600px

It's not something I would do by default but the results are pretty impressive.

 

[Jeff WX1USN]

WOW!

Again how is the low light performance?

Oi, what to do, but at least I can rent the R5ii to see for myself.

 

[Jeff WX1USN]

Levina
I posted a pic of a duck that was cropped severely but it wasn't the best to begin with, this one of a couple swans from last September was better to start with. the only editing was a touch of AI Denoise.
The R6ii will do a good job of handling severe crops but you need to start out with a good shot, it will highlight imperfections.

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

Again how is the low light performance?

You mean when cropped this severely? I don't know as I never crop this much. I will test tonight and will try to shoot at higher ISO's too, something I always try to avoid. But I'll test it.

a couple swans from last September was better to start with. the only editing was a touch of AI Denoise.

They look fine on my screen, yes. I think the R5m2 will do as good a job and probably better because you have more pixels on the subject. But I will test tonight with the gulls on the roof again. Hopefully some will fly in again so I can get similar shots to the ones I posted earlier and we can compare.

 

[Jeff WX1USN]

You mean when cropped this severely? I don't know as I never crop this much. I will test tonight and will try to shoot at higher ISO's too, something I always try to avoid. But I'll test it.


They look fine on my screen, yes. I think the R5m2 will do as good a job and probably better because you have more pixels on the subject. But I will test tonight with the gulls on the roof again. Hopefully some will fly in again so I can get similar shots to the ones I posted earlier and we can compare.

On the low light, I don't mean when cropped I mean full frame or lightly cropped shooting in low light, I think it is redundant as I will look back at the thread I think you posted shots with high ISO in low light and that they are the same until 12,800 and then after that the R6ii is slightly better, but I don't shoot that high that often.

Don't bother trying other shots on my behalf.

Here is another severe crop the difference is the Swans were shot at 1000 ISO 1/2500 and the duck at 5000 ISO 1/2000, the full frame shot on the swans is sharper due to the lower ISO while the duck in the full frame is soft. This is the type of thing I will test as best as I can with the rental R5ii, shoot at 5000 to 12000 ISO and crop I will do that at the ponds in the early morning.

Here is the duck at a higher ISO (5000) and severe crop it looks like a painting even with AI Denoise and AI Sharpen

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

On the low light, I don't mean when cropped I mean full frame or lightly cropped shooting in low light, I think it is redundant as I will look back at the thread I think you posted shots with high ISO in low light and that they are the same until 12,800 and then after that the R6ii is slightly better, but I don't shoot that high that often.

Don't bother trying other shots on my behalf.

Here is another severe crop the difference is the Swans were shot at 1000 ISO 1/2500 and the duck at 5000 ISO 1/2000, the full frame shot on the swans is sharper due to the lower ISO while the duck in the full frame is soft. This is the type of thing I will test as best as I can with the rental R5ii, shoot at 5000 to 12000 ISO and crop I will do that at the ponds in the early morning.

Here is the duck at a higher ISO (5000) and severe crop it looks like a painting even with AI Denoise and AI Sharpen
View attachment 11775
View attachment 11776

It's probably not just the high ISO but the original shot looks kinda hazy as well. That's not a good file so not surprised it didn't turn out well. I'm quite sure ISO 5000 in low light can do much better than your duck.

 

[Jeff WX1USN]

It's probably not just the high ISO but the original shot looks kinda hazy as well. That's not a good file so not surprised it didn't turn out well. I'm quite sure ISO 5000 in low light can do much better than your duck.

It was handheld on a hill so I was unstable, should have been shooting well over 1/2000th. I normally sit and brace and shoot this was standing on a sandy slope. again I will be testing these types of things the end of the month with the R5ii.
The big thing is $6,000 (with the accessories) is a chunk of money to spend for what I do, although I do want it so bad. With the R6iii coming out Q2 (from what sources say) the main difference will be the 45 vs 24 mpx on the sensors. From what they are saying it will be getting the AF from the R5ii just not the eye AF.
From what I anticipate I could get the R6iii and the R7ii (if and when it comes out) for less than the R5ii. That is another thing I will test is the 1.6x mode on the R5ii and compare it to the R7.

Here is another thought, if the R5ii in 1.6x and cropped in that mode like I do with the R7 is as good as the R7, i.e. cropping the R7 by about 50-70% and the R5ii in 1.6x mode, say shot with my RF 18-150 EFS, and cropped the same and if it is pretty much the same between them I could replace both the R6ii and the R7 and would still have my 7Dii as a backup camera.
Replacing the two cameras for one does actually make a lot of sense. can you post one of the pictures of the seagull you did the severe crop on above so I can see the original size before cropping?

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

can you post one of the pictures of the seagull you did the severe crop on above so I can see the original size before cropping?

Screenshot of the full size pic in DPP.

 

[Levina de Ruijter]

The big thing is $6,000 (with the accessories) is a chunk of money to spend for what I do, although I do want it so bad. With the R6iii coming out Q2 (from what sources say) the main difference will be the 45 vs 24 mpx on the sensors.

Seems to me the main difference: 45 vs 24 mpx.

Here is another thought, if the R5ii in 1.6x and cropped in that mode like I do with the R7 is as good as the R7, i.e. cropping the R7 by about 50-70% and the R5ii in 1.6x mode, say shot with my RF 18-150 EFS, and cropped the same and if it is pretty much the same between them I could replace both the R6ii and the R7 and would still have my 7Dii as a backup camera.

I did a little bit of testing in crop mode a few pages back in this thread. Other than that, I don't shoot in crop mode. As to comparing cropped files from the R5m2 with the R7, remember what you said here?

I wouldn't decide anything until you can rent it, Jeff. See for yourself.