EOS R5 Mark II

Helmet person has I think a Canon R1 or R3, though it could be an R5 with a portrait grip. Lens could be the 24-105 f/2.8. Presumably a similar body and different lens on the other shoulder. Sinna Nasseri then has a quite odd setup, to me that looks like a very small lens, perhaps adapted M mount, a

If that’s as close as you can get, and you’re going to crop to the same field of view - you’re throwing away any full frame advantage. And the R5 or R5II give you effectively a 17 megapixel APS-C camera with all the inherent disadvantages of APS-C vs full frame. The R7 has the most pixels per monkey

personally I would go for the r5 for the higher resolution sensor and better evf, personally I also prefer the top screen instead of the top dial. the r6iii is better for video, has better autofocus, pre capture, and faster shooting speed with slightly better rolling shutter. if you shoot pro level

For what it’s worth I’m a full time videographer (not cinematographer) working closely with brands such as Amazon, Uber, Honda, Tourism Australia etc. My daily is the pocket 4K, original, with the ultra speed booster for a full frame circle and I have to say the new Nikon ZR, canon R5II etc are clos

Their low-light performance will be effectively identical in any practical scenario. Higher resolution cameras allow for pixel peeping with more scrutiny, creating an unfair comparison with the appearance of more image noise, thus feeding the very common misconception of worse low-light performance.

Since you already have the R7, the R6 Mark II is the most complementary body in my opinion. it’s Canon’s best low-light and astro performer, and you don’t really gain much for those use cases by jumping to the R5 or R5 II unless you specifically need 45 MP for large landscape prints?

If you have no skills, you’re still likely to take lousy photos whether you have $100 worth of gear or $20,000 worth of gear. Once you have a certain level of skill, lower quality gear can absolutely hold you back, especially if you’re shooting fast-moving subjects or in low light. Sports photograph

Sports/adventure videographer/dp here. Often run Canon R5IIs (previously R5, R5C) in difficult environments (heavy snow primarily). The R5II stands out as having pretty great dynamic range for a MILC style body, internal 12bit raw (no need for external recorders adding bulk and compromising sealing)

Of course the R5 is a great camera, the R5II didn't make it worse. The R5II, however, seems like it merges the high speed and high resolution product lines in a way Canon has never done before. I have both an R5 and an R3 because there's photography situations that significantly favor one or the oth

R5 II is probably closest in terms of MP, but to be honest the R6II would work just fine for events / festivals etc (I also went 5DIV > R6II for the same kind of usage). Less MP, but more than enough and better Auto Focus. With the R6III out now, you could almost buy a couple of R6IIs (if you need a