EOSEFSRFISUSMDIGIC
Newcomer
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2026
- Posts
- 2
- Likes Received
- 2
- Points
- 3
- Name
- G
Hey there,
I have had my EOS R for about 7 years+ now. It has been a wonderful camera, serving my needs to photograph portrait and landscapes. Loved the build quality and for bringing me into the mirrorless world.
Recently however I've found myself doing a lot more Sports photography (Swimming, Water polo, Baseball...). And managed to get some decent shots, but boy is it a painful and frustrating experience.
The AF is unreliable, the fps is very low and most of the time misses the meat of the action, this combo makes me realize that as much as the EOS R is a wonderful camera once you can work within its limitations, it does not do the job to capture fast paced action. And I find myself loving this type of photography so much that I want to take it to the next level.
With that, I decided to replace it with either the R6 Mkiii (clearly leaning towards this one) but also want to consider the R5 mkii if it truly provides a leap in AF and fps quality (Mainly with electronic shutter).
My plan would be to shoot manual, 1/3000s, auto ISO. Servo mode with face/eye tracking, recording my key players faces and enjoy the shooting. 12fps sounds a lot better than the EOS-r 5ish (if even) fps I get right now, all without the AF struggling to figure out what is going on. I understand R6 has 40fps with electronic shutter, and R5 30, but almost double the read out of the R5 which may matter with ball games... However some reviewers showed examples where it would happen, mostly in games such as golf and baseball with the clubs and bats and in very specific situations, and a tiny touch with the ball.
I'm interested to hear from sports photographers here what their opinions are on this? Based on their current experience. 30 or 40fps sounds great in theory, but culling all those shots sounds painful. If 12fps is good enough, then R6 makes sense. If something about the R5 is really unique regarding sports photography, I'm ok eating the additional $1000. But even Electronic shutter seems plenty good on the R6 (+ smaller body size).
Like my EOS R I plan to use this as far as it can carry me in my photographic journey until I find the limitations are too hard to ignore. Will the R5mkii really carry me longer than the R6?
Appreciate your thoughts!
I have had my EOS R for about 7 years+ now. It has been a wonderful camera, serving my needs to photograph portrait and landscapes. Loved the build quality and for bringing me into the mirrorless world.
Recently however I've found myself doing a lot more Sports photography (Swimming, Water polo, Baseball...). And managed to get some decent shots, but boy is it a painful and frustrating experience.
The AF is unreliable, the fps is very low and most of the time misses the meat of the action, this combo makes me realize that as much as the EOS R is a wonderful camera once you can work within its limitations, it does not do the job to capture fast paced action. And I find myself loving this type of photography so much that I want to take it to the next level.
With that, I decided to replace it with either the R6 Mkiii (clearly leaning towards this one) but also want to consider the R5 mkii if it truly provides a leap in AF and fps quality (Mainly with electronic shutter).
My plan would be to shoot manual, 1/3000s, auto ISO. Servo mode with face/eye tracking, recording my key players faces and enjoy the shooting. 12fps sounds a lot better than the EOS-r 5ish (if even) fps I get right now, all without the AF struggling to figure out what is going on. I understand R6 has 40fps with electronic shutter, and R5 30, but almost double the read out of the R5 which may matter with ball games... However some reviewers showed examples where it would happen, mostly in games such as golf and baseball with the clubs and bats and in very specific situations, and a tiny touch with the ball.
I'm interested to hear from sports photographers here what their opinions are on this? Based on their current experience. 30 or 40fps sounds great in theory, but culling all those shots sounds painful. If 12fps is good enough, then R6 makes sense. If something about the R5 is really unique regarding sports photography, I'm ok eating the additional $1000. But even Electronic shutter seems plenty good on the R6 (+ smaller body size).
Like my EOS R I plan to use this as far as it can carry me in my photographic journey until I find the limitations are too hard to ignore. Will the R5mkii really carry me longer than the R6?
Appreciate your thoughts!
