R5 or R6M2? I'm trying to gather advice from experienced photographers to make choice without regret

[wdg0131]

Hello!

I know this topic is quite boring and already has been discussed a lot. I also researched all the videos about those two cameras and various forum posts. Let me introduce myself to give you guys my background. I'm an absolute hobbyist photographer. My current set-up is EOS 80D with ef-s 18-135, Sigma 35mm 1.4, and EF 50mm 1.4. I'm also planning to get EF 24-70 F2.8ii once I get FF mirrorless camera. I like to take a photo of things around me such as people who are close to me, pets, stray animals, and general aviation airports (love sunsets with airplanes, and I also love to take photos of my instructor colleagues, and students). I'm sure I'm not into Wildlife photography(Very cool, but I don't think I can spend a whole day under severe weather conditions to take a beautiful photo). I like to do street and landscape photography but not as frequently as first reasons. I'm sure the things I mentioned later are not the priority purposes. 

1st discussion I got here is: Since R5M2 came out, R5 price has dropped a lot. If you have enough budget to buy a new R6M2, there's a chance to get a used R5 with the same budget.

2nd discussion: I'm trying to get a body that can last a long time. There are a few things that make me think. R5: Way more MP(Lack of low light performance due to smaller pixels), Lower AF performance(people say it's still very good, but R6M2 has definitely better AF performance), Lower ISO performance(But IQ is noticeably better even with noise), 30mins Recording limit and possibly overheat(I don't do videography so those limitations are not a deal breaker to me), 8k and 4k 120fps capability(but R6M2 has better 4k60 IQ, also not a big deal since videography isn't my main goal, but if I happen to take a video, it'll be 4k 60fps most of the time), 12fps mechanical shutter and 20fps electronic shutter(R6m2 can shoot 40fps electronically, I assume 20fps is fast enough but I know faster is better), CFE B type capability(R6m2 only has 2 SD slots, I thought having CFE was way better than two SDs since CFE has way faster read and write speed. I was surprised that many people don't like CFE because of the higher cost. No experience with CFE but even though you have to pay more, aren't 5 times faster cards tempting?)

I understand that R6M2 is half generation-advanced body than R5. Except for MP, almost all essential features are better. However, Do you think the better features make the camera last longer over higher pixels? Don't forget if R6M2 were way cheaper like in the past, I wouldn't hesitate. I'm overthinking because the price gap between the two is very close nowadays.

I'm open to all advice and opinions! 

P.S. I edit photos on Lightroom Classic 99% of time.

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

If you are going to buy a mirrorless.body, plan to budget for RF glass.  If you have existing full frame EF lenses you can use them with a Canon Adapter, but I would recommend RF for future purchases.  

If you buy an R62, you will not want to use any of your EF-S lenses.  The camera will use crop mode and your resulting images will be about 9.3 MP. If you go R5, you'll be at about 17.5 MP.  

You seem to have 3 body's on the table.  R5, R52 and R62.

All 3 cameras should be brilliant and capable.. There's no reason to think the R52 won't be exceptional. 

The information about the photography you do most is helpful.  Given you are considering all 3, and coming from the 80D, I'd try to make the R62 or R52 happen if I could. The advanced AF, ISO performance, subject tracking, etc on the latter 2 will blow you away compared to the 80D (also a nice camera).  

The standard R5 is no slouch either, and is a top performer.  You'll need to decide if 24MP is enough and if not do you have budget for the R52.  You indicated you wanted something to last.  The mk II's are where that's at.  😄

If budget does not allow, the R5 remains an incredible value.  It's price is very attractive.  However, I'd say again, include budget for RF lenses.  Regardless of the body you choose, your lenses are the real investment.   Hope you'll find some of this helpful.  

[wdg0131]

Appreciate! R5M2 is out of range 😂. R5 price is not drawback anymore since Mark ii came out! Thank you for lense advice. I’m planning to get RF85 or 135 after EF 24-70, but it’ll take some time. They are not easily approachable price 😞 I’m planning to sell ef-s lenses with 80D once I get mirrorless as well. 

[kvbarkley]

Any body will last a long time. We have people here who still use XS', for heaven's sake. As to regrets, that is up to you. Something new and better *will* come along.

[shadowsports]

Perfect Idea.  A lot of people use their old camera and lenses to offset capital expense.

The RF135 is something else according to Jessica Joy. It's one of Canon's newer lenses that incorporates programmable buttons.

[johnrmoyer]

I have EOS 80D and EOS R5. To me the EOS R5 seemed a compromise taking away a need to choose between full frame or crop because it can do both. I do not have any RF lenses. All of my EF and EF-S lenses work better on my EOS R5 than on my EOS 80D. It took me a while to adapt myself to the differences between the 80D and R5 in how they focus. In 1.6x crop mode on the EOS R5, there are 5088x3392 pixels compared to 6000x4000 on the EOS 80D. I still use my EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens on my EOS R5 with the adapter. It is a very good lens for focus stacking. In the future I might want RF lenses, but not yet.

https://www.rsok.com/~jrm/2023Oct15_birds_and_cats/2023oct04_wildflower_IMG_6673-6676c.html

A wild orchid Spiranthes lacera var. gracilis commonly called Slender Ladies' Tresses blooming in Norman, Oklahoma, United States, on October 4, 2023 (focus stack of 4 images) ; EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

F Number	11.0
ISO	100
Focal Length	29.0 mm
Camera Temperature	37 C
Focus Distance Upper	0.62 m
Focus Distance Lower	0.44 m
Lens Model	EF-S18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM
Focus Stack	Depth Composite of 4 Images

[JCin]

I have two R6 MKII and I was going to replace one with an R5 because I mainly shoot portraiture. Now that the R5MKII is out, I'm saving up for it instead. Between the R6 MKII and the R5, it would depend what is important to you. They are both great cameras and the R5 will stand with a lot of newer cameras today. If higher mp is your thing, go with the R5. If shutter speed and auto focus are key, the R6 MKII. And yes, the glass in front of your camera is of high importance. For primes, I own the RF85 1.2 and the RF135 1.8. The RF85 is my main portrait lens. It is bulky and heavy besides costly, although magical. I like the RF135 in that it is easier to run around with and also has IS. Recently shot an event with the RF135 and it was a pleasure using this lens, and I like the programmable buttons on it as well.

[Tronhard]

Hi and welcome!
Your description of what you shoot and your understanding of the differences between the two bodies is very helpful.  The one thing you have not been very specific on, yet is very important, is what you produce.  This is one of the most critical questions because it's all about the end product when it comes down to it.

From a features perspective, the higher MP count on the R5 will give you the chance to crop, but that is possibly countered by the R6II's better focusing and dynamic range.  So, a decider could well be what image size do you need to output.   The needs for social media, digital display and magazine-size or slightly larger prints don't require more than what the R6 can deliver - that is why the flagship R1 has only 24MP - their priority is delivering images of that size in real time.  That may not be your priority, but if you don't need the resolution then you gain the benefit of the cheaper body, newer focusing and better DR of the R6II. 

On the other hand, if you are going to produce very large, detailed prints that one could even sell then you want the higher MP count.

[wdg0131]

I take photos, sort good shots for Lr editing, and then give edited JPG files to people associated with those photos. So I assume that people who got my photos watch those on the phone screen or tablets. Printing isn't my primary. Also, the reason I'm thinking this is that a used R5 and a new R6M2 have a very close price gap nowadays.

Appreciate your advice!

[TomRamsey]

I will always advise for going for the newest technology that you can afford as long as the camera is adequate for your needs.  I recently bought the R5 Mark II for nature shooting, I do mostly landscapes and wildlife, my primary attraction to the R6 Mark II was for wildlife, but being 24 MP should result in more dynamic range over a larger MP camera.  I did a lot of research but the autofocus was probably the most important spec.  I was tempted to look at more megapixels, but I have two other non Canon cameras in the 24 MP range, and I'm satisfied with their output, and they are APS-C, so I should be getting more dynamic range with the R6ii.

If you haven't already, do a side by side comparison of the features and specs that YOU actually use or maybe would like to use.  Unfortunately, you cannot take a menu and select exactly the specs and features and have a camera built to your specs., but Canon has an amazing range of different cameras, one or two will be close, and you've already selected two.  But you need to weigh all of the pros and cons, and make the choice, after all, the camera is for you.  You are doing a smart thing here in asking questions, because reviewers tend to make tiny differences into large differences.  An example is the ergonomics of a camera, I've seen reviews that really make a big deal out of that.  Personally, I now have three different cameras that are laid out differently, two are pretty similar in where the buttons are, but the grips are very different, but i have found no problem adapting to any of them after using the camera a couple of times.  This example wasn't about the egonomics, but how reviews can totally give a wrong impression.

By the way, I do prefer SD over CFE because of cost, I don't need my cards to write five times faster, I can't remember when I have had to wait for the camera to finish writing to a card.  But then I seldom do a burst of over five or six shots.