R5 vs R6

[SamanthaCat]

Hi, Canon community! I’m upgrading my old trusty 80d for a mirrorless camera. I learned photography on a film camera back in the early 90s. I’m currently working on some fine art images with the hopes of exhibiting them. I’ve read a lot of reviews about both the r5 & r6. It sounds like people think the r6 is comparable to the r5 except it costs a lot less. Is this an accurate statement? My main concerns are focus and quality. I’m currently leaning towards the r5 but if I have to buy all new RF lenses then buying the r6 might be logical. However, I believe I could also use an adaptor on the r5 and that would allow me to use EF lenses, correct? 

[p4pictures]

Functionally the EOS R6 and EOS R5 are similar especially if you are comparing the original (aka Mark 1). The key differences are EOS R5 has 45MP and EOS R6 has 20MP. EOS R5 due to the higher resolution can detect smaller subjects in the frame for subject tracking. Both cameras use the RF lens mount, and both can be used with the EF to EOS R mount adapter to allow EF lenses to be used, and this is often helpful when making a transition from DSLR to mirrorless, but over time you should look to move to RF lenses.

As to quality, both are high quality, EOS R6 is better in low light - bigger pixels - and the EOS R5 has more resolution. Both are more than capable of making an A3+ / 13-inch x 19-inch print and actually a bit larger too. 

There are also the EOS R6 Mark II and EOS R5 Mark II, they are also comparable, with one having 24MP and the other 45MP. The AF system on the EOS R5 Mark II is a further enhancement from the EOS R6 Mark II, which was already significantly improved from the original EOS R5 / EOS R6.

EOS R5 Mark II EOS R6 Mark II 

[shadowsports]

Brian's description and assessment of these bodies is spot on.  If you decide the R6 is the right camera for you, I strongly recommend you consider the R6 Mark II instead.  While it does cost a bit more, it's increased performance over the R6 MarkI is pretty dramatic.  It's something you would definitely grow with and appreciate.

[johnrmoyer]

I went from EOS 80D to EOS R5. I do not have any RF lenses. All of my EF and EF-S lenses work better on the R5 than on the EOS 80D. In 1.6x crop mode, the R5 has only a few less pixels than the 80D. The R5 is like always having the 80D in live view mode but with the live view in the viewfinder.

While the R6 has fewer pixels and therefore a better signal to noise ratio per pixel, in post processing of R5 images the smaller pixels can be combined using noise reduction followed by downscaling and sharpening. Since the sensor size is the same between R5 and R6, the same total amount of light is captured.

It seems to me that the R6 would require less post processing to make a print. The R6 II would have the same number of pixels as the 80D.

Good luck

[ctitanic]

With either camera you can use EF lenses using a EF to RF adapter. You can't go wrong with either of the two cameras. If you do a lot of cropping then R5 is your answer, otherwise you can go with the R6 and save some money that you can apply toward buying a RF lens (No that you need it) or any other accessory. Keep in mind that the R5 uses CFexpress cards and they are not cheap.