Please note that the R5 mark two had a SD card in there first for about the first 1000 shots and then a C fast express type B was added a few hours later. The 1/3 reference on the battery is a guesstimate this morning. It was 18% when I checked it now it’s 16% so looks like it’s dropping even while it’s actually sitting there. There is no intention of misleading anyone here I will make a follow up video and show all of the photos all 2700 of them in the next video.
Just came across you whilst browsing, did you shoot all shoots hand held ?? Enjoyed your photos and chat and have a new subscriber. Sadly some people on the Internet love to moan about equipment regardless. I tend to watch honest positive reviews like yours and show what’s a camera can do rather than continually criticise. I come from cameras with 24-36 roll of film and no fast shooting luxuries and have to send of your film and wait weeks to get the results of either good or not so good photos but that was the excitement of not knowing. Digital, AF and modern computers have made taking pictures much easier than in the past. You have a new subscriber and look forward to watching more of your videos 🤩🤩
Going to guess the "buffer" issue on the R1 has more to do with not having a fast enough CF card to offload the buffer. I will say I have noticed that the R5-ii will drain the battery faster than I was expecting when the camera is off. It's nothing crazy just when it sits for a few days it will drop the battery a noticable amount. Not a big deal to me I just pull the battery when I'm done from the day. I will be picking up a couple extra batteries because it does run thru them quite a bit faster than the DSLR I replaced. I was typically able to shoot all day on 1-1.5 batteries with the DSLR, with the aR5-ii I'm pushing to the end of 2. I'm not complaining about the battery life at all, I just want a extra backup to make sure I don't have to worry. I have pretty much zero complaints on the AF. The one major instance I had an issue with it focusing on the wrong thing was my fault cause I had previously been doing something else and missed changing a setting back. With that said it took me a bit to realize what was wrong because it was still nailing most of the shots even with the setting wrong. And just to add to what you were saying I'm getting excellent results with an L series lens that is close to 30 years old. I would bet pitting it against the RF equivalent it would still hold up and without really digging be hard to tell the difference in the images.
I’ve also had the r5 II from launch, from a battery perspective it eats them if if mechanical or first curtain. I get about 1/3 of the shots on a battery. With doing daytime photography I’ll be in electric shutter all day, but if shooting a nighttime sporting event or concert I have to be in first curtain or mechanical to not get banding from the led lights. I also find that the low light performance is about 1 stop better at night when using mechanical vs electronic. Nothing bad, it just is what it is. Thought I would share.
It was nice seeing you at the dam I was in front of you it was a lovely day with eagles, I have no problem with my R5 ll with EF 600mm f4 Mk ll + 1.4 tc Mk lll
My Om-1 Mk II also nails those against the dam shots. My Mk 1 didn't. My R5 MkII had a 90% hit rate here also. Light was good at the time. I do have to run DxO PR4 NR at those ISOs on the OM.
I remember the days of film cameras when we had to replace batteries maybe once a year. Even with our power hungry modern cameras, I never really understood the YT Reviewers consternation about battery life. I carry 3 fully charged batteries while out in the field. If a battery gets 3-4 hours, that is more than enough for me. Usually, I have about 20% battery life when I get home from a day's shooting. I average about 4-6 hours in the field a couple times a week. Average 300-500 images on any given day. One tip for folks with multiple batteries is to number them. Mine are 1, 2, 3. I rotate them so that I'm not hammering the same battery all the time. Some great results with your cameras and that 800mm lens. A buddy has the 600mm version and he always gets good results. I think it is one of those occasional lenses that punches way above its weight class.. Now, if Canon would include a few cross type focus spots on the R7II body, I would probably be first in line to get one.
I don't know if you are a professional one or not but i think you have problem with exposures they are not right as they should be in camera, fixing the exposure in post you are introducing a lot of shifting tones and noise of course. have fun
@@bobogate1 of course keep in mind majority of the shots you sell were shot by my 14-year-old son. It has nothing to do with whether you are professional or not. You are correct anytime you’re off on the exposure you will introduce noise however, these sensors have come a very long way is the point not whether someone is a professional or not.
On my R1 51600 ISO is very useable if exposed properly. Cleans up easily and well in post. On my R3 the limit was about 25600. Subjectively speaking, I think the R1 has about a 1-stop advantage compared to my R3.
my preorder got canceled (out of my control) for the R1 since they could not fulfill by the 28th.. ordered 6 months in advance. they have in stock now however putting this on pause until money is more saved up. cant wait ! a photojournalists dream camera.
Use the R5 mark two link in the description and go to BNH and order the R one you should be able to get to the main site at least. Let me know once you order it and as long as it is true, 247 media group I can reach out and see if we can get you one fairly soon.
Whether 24MP is enough depends on what you want to do with the photo. If you’ve got enough reach with a big lens then you can fill the frame enough to not have to crop too much. If you’re using a high quality lens that can produce sharp images but doesn’t give you the same reach then you have to crop much more of course. So, yes you can crop the heck out of a 24MP image and have it look good but let’s be clear; large crops always look good or acceptable when viewed on-screen and may not be the best way to judge "quality". Printing that same image may not look all that good. If the intent is to print at a decent size then it makes sense to have more megapixels to start out with and will look better. And then we now have the ability to upscale very well in post with various software to turn 24MP into 96MP or more with good results so smaller resolution sensors and large crops are less of an issue than they once were. We have a LOT of options today that can work well for whatever final output is needed. Oh, and one other thing: you should stop comparing a Nikon Z8 - an older $4,000 camera when new - to a brand new Canon costing $6,300 which is $2,300 more expensive. For that much more it had better be better! Not a fair comparison by any means whether it’s an older and less expensive Nikon or Sony.
@@glennn.3464 last time I checked the canon R5 Markii is around the same price as the z8. The R1 blows both of them to water and it should for $6300. Hope that helps.
I like you channel and content. I think the crop was too much and you didn't have the reach needed to take next level photos. That's not a knock on your talent but gear used.
@@camerasutra247 Did you use an extender? I will watch the video again to find out but how did you rate the R5II compared to the R1 based on being able to crop in more? Keep the videos coming.
@@camerasutra247 Again it's crazy that Canon is sending out R1's to You Tubers that are making the same parroted negative reviews that will hurt Canon sales. The same with the R5II. I do have questions about the R1 and R5II overheating or the R5II and if they had to sacrifice quality in video compared to the R3. You are the only You Tuber that actually are trying to dive deep into these cameras and give feedback based on how these camera will perform in the real world. You are correct about these bodies get more out of average glass. If you can compare video footage from the R1 and R5II. $K 120p would be awesome.
On my R1 I shoot Raw+JPG-L....at 30 FPS never hit the buffer despite intentionally trying. At 40 FPS never hit the buffer unless intentionally trying. Seems to be about 10-15 seconds at 40 FPS RAW+JPG-L before buffer issues. In my opinion buffer is not an issue at all on the R1.
Canon listens to more than just the pros. This was an interesting video considering what cameras you were using. Canon has definitely stepped up there game for action photographers. Still waiting on Nikon to match the R7. I’m afraid it will never happen. They truly care only for there pro shooters.
I have 2 r5 ii that I got on day one when released. Ive shot almost 20 major wedding already, and with two batteries I can get through about 9 hrs on each camera! Very decent battery life, Yes the nikon z8 is a tad bit better, but the evf and screen on the nikon z8 is pure garbage compared to the r5ii
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Please note that the R5 mark two had a SD card in there first for about the first 1000 shots and then a C fast express type B was added a few hours later. The 1/3 reference on the battery is a guesstimate this morning. It was 18% when I checked it now it’s 16% so looks like it’s dropping even while it’s actually sitting there. There is no intention of misleading anyone here I will make a follow up video and show all of the photos all 2700 of them in the next video.
Just came across you whilst browsing, did you shoot all shoots hand held ?? Enjoyed your photos and chat and have a new subscriber. Sadly some people on the Internet love to moan about equipment regardless. I tend to watch honest positive reviews like yours and show what’s a camera can do rather than continually criticise. I come from cameras with 24-36 roll of film and no fast shooting luxuries and have to send of your film and wait weeks to get the results of either good or not so good photos but that was the excitement of not knowing. Digital, AF and modern computers have made taking pictures much easier than in the past. You have a new subscriber and look forward to watching more of your videos 🤩🤩
Welcome and thank you. Not all shoots are handheld I so use a gitzo tripod with a manfrotto m502 head or my carbon fiber gimbal.
Going to guess the "buffer" issue on the R1 has more to do with not having a fast enough CF card to offload the buffer. I will say I have noticed that the R5-ii will drain the battery faster than I was expecting when the camera is off. It's nothing crazy just when it sits for a few days it will drop the battery a noticable amount. Not a big deal to me I just pull the battery when I'm done from the day. I will be picking up a couple extra batteries because it does run thru them quite a bit faster than the DSLR I replaced. I was typically able to shoot all day on 1-1.5 batteries with the DSLR, with the aR5-ii I'm pushing to the end of 2. I'm not complaining about the battery life at all, I just want a extra backup to make sure I don't have to worry.
I have pretty much zero complaints on the AF. The one major instance I had an issue with it focusing on the wrong thing was my fault cause I had previously been doing something else and missed changing a setting back. With that said it took me a bit to realize what was wrong because it was still nailing most of the shots even with the setting wrong. And just to add to what you were saying I'm getting excellent results with an L series lens that is close to 30 years old. I would bet pitting it against the RF equivalent it would still hold up and without really digging be hard to tell the difference in the images.
@@atrix19851185 you nailed it
I’ve also had the r5 II from launch, from a battery perspective it eats them if if mechanical or first curtain. I get about 1/3 of the shots on a battery. With doing daytime photography I’ll be in electric shutter all day, but if shooting a nighttime sporting event or concert I have to be in first curtain or mechanical to not get banding from the led lights. I also find that the low light performance is about 1 stop better at night when using mechanical vs electronic. Nothing bad, it just is what it is. Thought I would share.
That’s awesome information he was shooting all electronic the entire time.
It was nice seeing you at the dam I was in front of you it was a lovely day with eagles, I have no problem with my R5 ll with EF 600mm f4 Mk ll + 1.4 tc Mk lll
Awesome yes you have an incredible combination there. Send me an email amar@247mediagroupllc.com and let’s connect
nice bud, cool presentation. that $900 lens really shines and these Canon's nail focus. But I have question. Why eagles hang around here?
I’m telling you man this order the camera no other brand new one comes close right now.
My Om-1 Mk II also nails those against the dam shots. My Mk 1 didn't. My R5 MkII had a 90% hit rate here also. Light was good at the time. I do have to run DxO PR4 NR at those ISOs on the OM.
👌
I remember the days of film cameras when we had to replace batteries maybe once a year. Even with our power hungry modern cameras, I never really understood the YT Reviewers consternation about battery life. I carry 3 fully charged batteries while out in the field. If a battery gets 3-4 hours, that is more than enough for me. Usually, I have about 20% battery life when I get home from a day's shooting. I average about 4-6 hours in the field a couple times a week. Average 300-500 images on any given day. One tip for folks with multiple batteries is to number them. Mine are 1, 2, 3. I rotate them so that I'm not hammering the same battery all the time. Some great results with your cameras and that 800mm lens. A buddy has the 600mm version and he always gets good results. I think it is one of those occasional lenses that punches way above its weight class.. Now, if Canon would include a few cross type focus spots on the R7II body, I would probably be first in line to get one.
🤣
Great shots and great demonstration 👍
@@alisonandguywildlifephotograph Thank you
I don't know if you are a professional one or not but i think you have problem with exposures they are not right as they should be in camera, fixing the exposure in post you are introducing a lot of shifting tones and noise of course. have fun
@@bobogate1 of course keep in mind majority of the shots you sell were shot by my 14-year-old son. It has nothing to do with whether you are professional or not. You are correct anytime you’re off on the exposure you will introduce noise however, these sensors have come a very long way is the point not whether someone is a professional or not.
On my R1 51600 ISO is very useable if exposed properly. Cleans up easily and well in post. On my R3 the limit was about 25600. Subjectively speaking, I think the R1 has about a 1-stop advantage compared to my R3.
I would say that to true statement. The R1 is one sick machine.
my preorder got canceled (out of my control) for the R1 since they could not fulfill by the 28th.. ordered 6 months in advance. they have in stock now however putting this on pause until money is more saved up. cant wait ! a photojournalists dream camera.
Use the R5 mark two link in the description and go to BNH and order the R one you should be able to get to the main site at least. Let me know once you order it and as long as it is true, 247 media group I can reach out and see if we can get you one fairly soon.
Whether 24MP is enough depends on what you want to do with the photo. If you’ve got enough reach with a big lens then you can fill the frame enough to not have to crop too much. If you’re using a high quality lens that can produce sharp images but doesn’t give you the same reach then you have to crop much more of course. So, yes you can crop the heck out of a 24MP image and have it look good but let’s be clear; large crops always look good or acceptable when viewed on-screen and may not be the best way to judge "quality". Printing that same image may not look all that good. If the intent is to print at a decent size then it makes sense to have more megapixels to start out with and will look better. And then we now have the ability to upscale very well in post with various software to turn 24MP into 96MP or more with good results so smaller resolution sensors and large crops are less of an issue than they once were. We have a LOT of options today that can work well for whatever final output is needed. Oh, and one other thing: you should stop comparing a Nikon Z8 - an older $4,000 camera when new - to a brand new Canon costing $6,300 which is $2,300 more expensive. For that much more it had better be better! Not a fair comparison by any means whether it’s an older and less expensive Nikon or Sony.
@@glennn.3464 last time I checked the canon R5 Markii is around the same price as the z8. The R1 blows both of them to water and it should for $6300. Hope that helps.
watching now with an open mind lol
Time to open the wallet lol
I like you channel and content. I think the crop was too much and you didn't have the reach needed to take next level photos. That's not a knock on your talent but gear used.
@@contentm3893 agreed need a 1200mm
@@camerasutra247 Did you use an extender? I will watch the video again to find out but how did you rate the R5II compared to the R1 based on being able to crop in more? Keep the videos coming.
@@camerasutra247 Again it's crazy that Canon is sending out R1's to You Tubers that are making the same parroted negative reviews that will hurt Canon sales. The same with the R5II. I do have questions about the R1 and R5II overheating or the R5II and if they had to sacrifice quality in video compared to the R3. You are the only You Tuber that actually are trying to dive deep into these cameras and give feedback based on how these camera will perform in the real world. You are correct about these bodies get more out of average glass. If you can compare video footage from the R1 and R5II. $K 120p would be awesome.
On my R1 I shoot Raw+JPG-L....at 30 FPS never hit the buffer despite intentionally trying. At 40 FPS never hit the buffer unless intentionally trying. Seems to be about 10-15 seconds at 40 FPS RAW+JPG-L before buffer issues. In my opinion buffer is not an issue at all on the R1.
I had that sucker held down. It would just not hit the buffer. Very impressive.
Canon listens to more than just the pros. This was an interesting video considering what cameras you were using. Canon has definitely stepped up there game for action photographers. Still waiting on Nikon to match the R7. I’m afraid it will never happen. They truly care only for there pro shooters.
They do, I’m very happy with both cameras, the speed is incredible!
@@CSstorytime Excellent
I wouldn't know what to do with that much camera :) I bet it is nice to shoot with.
It’s definitely fast as heck
I have 2 r5 ii that I got on day one when released. Ive shot almost 20 major wedding already, and with two batteries I can get through about 9 hrs on each camera! Very decent battery life, Yes the nikon z8 is a tad bit better, but the evf and screen on the nikon z8 is pure garbage compared to the r5ii
@@bryllupmiami3499 Agreed
btw 24K unread emails? LOL , check your inbox lol
I know! I am way behind on my emails.
Get to the point, please.
Which point did you want me to get to?
Don’t mention sorry Nikon you don’t have it. Nikon fanboys are charging now. 😂😂😂😂
@@adminggroup5737 But of course I do I still shoot my ZF with the so called Z9 autofocus 😆