Canon R5 Considering an R5 for Wildlife

[Brian1965]

...but what lenses for wildlife?

 

[Cybot996]

I’ve been reading that the R6 is a better camera. Handles low light really well compared to the R5.

 

[Tim Mayo]

I can't speak for the R6 but do love my R5 for wildlife. The 45 megapixels are really helpful as I can rarely get as close as I would like to my subjects, apart from the birds in my garden!

You can see a full list of RF lenses over on our blog here: https://rfshooters.com/blog/lenses/

But for wildlife if you want to stick to native lenses then your options today are:

Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM
Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM
Canon RF 600mm F11 IS STM
Canon RF 800mm F11 IS STM
Canon RF 400mm F2.8 L IS USM
Canon RF 600mm F4 L IS USM

I love my RF 100-500 but I think it's terribly overpriced, especially if compared to Sony's 200-600 lens which is very good and around $900 less.

 

[PhotoJim58]

I’ve been reading that the R6 is a better camera. Handles low light really well compared to the R5.

with all those megapixels the R5 does a very decent job with noise and with Topaz DeNoise its not a problem at all.

 

[RedCobra]

I’ve been reading that the R6 is a better camera. Handles low light really well compared to the R5.

Better? 20mps vs 45mps. The diff in low light ability is very very small in real life. Bought a R6, sent it back and bought a second R5.

 

[Brian1965]

Better? 20mps vs 45mps. The diff in low light ability is very very small in real life. Bought a R6, sent it back and bought a second R5.

OK, thanks.

 

[Frank Stellitano]

I own the R6 and am very happy with it; the sensor is the best on any digital camera I have owned. If I could have afforded it, I would have purchased the R5.

 

[Brian1965]

I own the R6 and am very happy with it; the sensor is the best on any digital camera I have owned. If I could have afforded it, I would have purchased the R5.

Thank you.

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

I shot Nikon for wildlife for 10 years. Someone put an R5 with 100-500mm in my hand and I sold off my Nikon gear. I have both the R5 and R6, which I use for non-wildlife stuff, and I can count the number of times I've had R5 noise that was too much to handle with Topaz Denoise AI on one hand. The 45MP's make for big files and slower processing at times, but 20MP's isn't enough unless you're going to be filling the frame all the time.

 

[Frank Stellitano]

with all those megapixels the R5 does a very decent job with noise and with Topaz DeNoise its not a problem at all.

I have not had a need for denoise in a long time. If fact, I am a little surprised to hear anyone is still using this software in general. Of course, it is not like I interact with many people; 99% of my interaction is on social media.

 

[Frank Stellitano]

I shot Nikon for wildlife for 10 years. Someone put an R5 with 100-500mm in my hand and I sold off my Nikon gear. I have both the R5 and R6, which I use for non-wildlife stuff, and I can count the number of times I've had R5 noise that was too much to handle with Topaz Denoise AI on one hand. The 45MP's make for big files and slower processing at times, but 20MP's isn't enough unless you're going to be filling the frame all the time.

True that with respect to cropping 20MP files; one has to shoot somewhat conservatively if you know what I mean. In other words, I just got into the habit of framing my shots as if cropping won't happen. It has become instinct now.
I wish I had an R5.

 

[PhotoJim58]

I have not had a need for denoise in a long time. If fact, I am a little surprised to hear anyone is still using this software in general. Of course, it is not like I interact with many people; 99% of my interaction is on social media.

I mainly shoot birds and a lot of times I am using significantly high ISO.

 

[Deepgreen]

I can't speak for the R6 but do love my R5 for wildlife. The 45 megapixels are really helpful as I can rarely get as close as I would like to my subjects, apart from the birds in my garden!

You can see a full list of RF lenses over on our blog here: https://rfshooters.com/blog/lenses/

But for wildlife if you want to stick to native lenses then your options today are:

Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM
Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM
Canon RF 600mm F11 IS STM
Canon RF 800mm F11 IS STM
Canon RF 400mm F2.8 L IS USM
Canon RF 600mm F4 L IS USM

I love my RF 100-500 but I think it's terribly overpriced, especially if compared to Sony's 200-600 lens which is very good and around $900 less.

The RF100-500 is expensive but it's robust - I accidentally dropped mine in a river in Scotland, but it dried out to resume working perfectly. Its clarity is hugely better than the 600mm F11, which I regret buying before I went for the 100-500.

 

[Deepgreen]

A vixen sunbathing in our garden, taken with the R5, RF100-500mm, plus x2 extender.

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[Brian1965]

I can't speak for the R6 but do love my R5 for wildlife. The 45 megapixels are really helpful as I can rarely get as close as I would like to my subjects, apart from the birds in my garden!

You can see a full list of RF lenses over on our blog here: https://rfshooters.com/blog/lenses/

But for wildlife if you want to stick to native lenses then your options today are:

Canon RF 100-400mm F5.6-8 IS USM
Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM
Canon RF 600mm F11 IS STM
Canon RF 800mm F11 IS STM
Canon RF 400mm F2.8 L IS USM
Canon RF 600mm F4 L IS USM

I love my RF 100-500 but I think it's terribly overpriced, especially if compared to Sony's 200-600 lens which is very good and around $900 less.

The R5 doesn't leave me a lot of breathing room to buy 2 or 3 lenses.

 

[RedCobra]

I mainly shoot birds and a lot of times I am using significantly high ISO.

I find DxO 's Deep Prime to be better than the Topaz NR, and i like the lens and camera profiles in the DxO stuff better than Adobe.

 

[Deepgreen]

True that with respect to cropping 20MP files; one has to shoot somewhat conservatively if you know what I mean. In other words, I just got into the habit of framing my shots as if cropping won't happen. It has become instinct now.
I wish I had an R5.

A very good habit but one that cannot always be exercised with distant subjects.

 

[Brian1965]

I find DxO 's Deep Prime to be better than the Topaz NR, and i like the lens and camera profiles in the DxO stuff better than Adobe.

What's that?

 

[Devin]

...but what lenses for wildlife?

100-500mm L. hands down the best

 

[Frank Stellitano]

A very good habit but one that cannot always be exercised with distant subjects.

True dat. I certainly do my fair share of cropping.

 

[RedCobra]

What's that?

DxO photo editing software: For the passionate photographer.

Unlock your potential with DxO's advanced, award-winning photo editing software: PhotoLab, ViewPoint, PureRAW, FilmPack, and Nik Collection. Free trials available.

www.dxo.com

 

[PhotoJim58]

I find DxO 's Deep Prime to be better than the Topaz NR, and i like the lens and camera profiles in the DxO stuff better than Adobe.

thanks

 

[Kerro]

I find DxO 's Deep Prime to be better than the Topaz NR, and i like the lens and camera profiles in the DxO stuff better than Adobe.

All my raw files go to DxO Deep Prime before I even start work on them. The difference is noticeable when compared.

 

[BradS]

No one has mentioned Lightroom Classic's Denoise, which I find works very well. If LR is already part of your workflow, it only costs and additional small amount of time to apply Denoise there. In the comparisons I've seen it is approximately as good as DXO's Pure Raw and slightly better than Topaz Denoise through their Photo AI app.

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

No one has mentioned Lightroom Classic's Denoise, which I find works very well. If LR is already part of your workflow, it only costs and additional small amount of time to apply Denoise there. In the comparisons I've seen it is approximately as good as DXO's Pure Raw and slightly better than Topaz Denoise through their Photo AI app.

Been definitely mentioned here. Does a good job denoising, sure, but to call it "approximately as good as DXO" ignores the fact that it has no AI sharpening. Long story short, I can use Lr to replicate what I get from Pure Raw 3 on almost any image. If I have 5 shots I might be consider eating the time required. If I have 25 I've now cost myself over an hour just in denoise and sharpening time with no other processing just to get where I'd be with one click and a trip to the can while I wait. If I shoot 25 images every time I go out and I go out 4-5 times a week I'm now losing almost a day every month just in denoise time (plus it takes on average 20-30% longer to apply in my experience). That's not "small" by any stretch in my book.

Not sure what your time is worth, or how much you shoot, and I'm not being flippant about the cost of the software because it's something that took me months to consider paying for. But these are things you have to factor when you shoot any significant amount. Pure Raw 3 has already paid for itself in time saved for me. I wish it had a bit of the tweakability factor that Lr and Topaz provide, but I can think of maybe 2 or 3 out of over 1000 images where I've said, "Nah, let me try something else - that doesn't look right".

 

[BradS]

I was referring to this particular thread with my comment about not mentioning LR Classic Denoise. I realize it is discussed elswhere on this forum. LRC does apply sharpening also, it's just not "advertised". My bird images are regularly cropped, which speeds up LRC Denoise, which I agree can be slow when applied to the entire frame. My workflow is usually LRC to Photoshop, where I often invoke Topaz Photo AI. There I can get all the additional controlled sharpening I want, and rather quickly. I can also mask, in Photoshop, certain areas of the Photo AI image for less sharpening which is sometimes useful. I haven't tried DXO Pure Raw since version 1. I felt it was often oversharpening then and there was no control on the amount, so I left it behind and adopted my current approach, which works well for me. I guess to each his own.

 

[RickyRed]

The R5 cannot be beat for wildlife. The Sigma 60-600 Sp or 150-600 sp with max 6.3 at long end. Priced at $2000.00 Us