Happy Decision to make

I am in the fortunate position that I can upgrade my older APS-C digital camera to a top end full frame model.

 

As I have been and EOS user since the days of film (and still use film alongside digital), I have a decent set of EF lenses.

 

I cannot make my mind up whether to go for an EOS 5D Mk iv or an EOS R (with adaptor) .

 

My main interests are in landscape, travel and architectural subjects with some macro thrown in.

 

The weight and size of the bodies are not an issue, I hump around a Mamiya RB67 a lot of the time.

 

Can anyone give me some good advice, please?

 

Gerry

Good advice.. no.. we don't do that here :-)

My opinion you can have.

I only played with the R for 20 min at a Canon experience day.

I loved the R lenses, expensive but real good.. Did not like the body.

I did not like the viewfinder, it has a strange lag, and it darkens after you take a photo. (took a bit before it displayed image after taking photo)

If you wanted the photo you took to display on the back screen for 1 or 3 sec (as my 5d's do) then it would also do this in the viewfinder..very anoying when you are in a series.

battery life is soso, userinterface witht he extra ring on the lenses is not intuitive.

I will wait till the next (pro) version of the R.

 

So i bought the 5d4. Love it. It's fast, intuitive. a beast. great fast focusing.

And i still use the 5d2 (the 100-400 is on it now)

the 100 2.8 Lis macro kind of lives on my 5d4.

If you want to use your EF lenses, I'd stay with the regular EOS cameras. If you really want lots of pixels, the 5Ds is nice.

 

If you are going to the R, buy the lenses made for it. It can fun to mount classic old lenses on newer machines, but for most serious work, adapting is not the way to go.

 

I've got every adapter made for most 35mm cameras and enjoy using my wonderful old M42, etc. lenses, but it's for fun.

Edited August 8, 2019 by JDMvW

. . I have a decent set of EF lenses. My main interests are in landscape, travel and architectural subjects with some macro thrown in. . .

 

What lenses, specifically?

 

WW

Just wanted to say congratulations. I really enjoy my 5D Mark IV, and I don't think I should admit exactly how happy I was when I finally got one.

I think they are both very well abled bodies. I do like DSLR's and I'm just not ready to shift into mirrorless any time soon. That's not advice, that's just my opinion.

 

Nevertheless, I think I would be happy with either one to be honest.

If you really like your lenses, go with the 5DIV. They have packed some nice functions into the R and the extra ring on the R-lenses seems kind of handy.

If you want really top notch new lenses (second to none in the world) then you must go to RF. Wait a little for more mature body.

Face it 28-70/2 L f2 !

Supersharp wide open RF 50/1.2L whuch can be focused by a very far off center focus point without recomposing and horrible softness or by the eyes of the object portrayed.

If you don't want to get above mentioned lenses then get Mk 3 (but new).

A new mark III May be hard to find, as they are discontinued. For example, neither B&H nor Adorama still stocks them.

The first generation mirrorless is going through typical 1st generation issues.

They are finding out the hit/miss of what they made vs. what the market wants.

But IF you want to go future, go mirrorless.

 

That is not to say that dSLRs will go away any time soon.

If you shoot sports, at present, I would go with a dSLR over a mirrorless.

 

Using the EVF in challenging lighting situation is wonderful.

I can adjust the exposure BEFORE pressing the shutter.

 

One thing that caught me by surprise is the run time of the mirrorless battery. For me, carrying a spare battery is mandatory.

The mirrorless camera drains a lot more power than a dSLR. Run time seem to be more determined by "power ON" time, rather than number of shots.

You should research the run time of the Canon R, and plan on a spare batteries.

I had to get FOUR batteries for my Olympus EM1-mk1. It's 4 hour continuous run time, results in me running battery #3 almost to empty at the end of a full day of shooting.

How does

main interests are in landscape, travel and architectural subjects with some macro thrown in

connect with overweight stay at home junk like

28-70/2 L f2 !

Supersharp wide open RF 50/1.2L

?

I think for traveling convenience I would market the R with the new 24-105, which is rumored to be significantly better than the EF counterparts, that might be a bit weak on the 5DIV?

I didn't use an R yet, but think touristic shots can be done with a MILC pretty well. My reasons to get a 5D IV after trying out Fujis were the snappy AF and the ability to utilize an red pattern assist light, which the MILCs seem to lack. - I basically needed something to cover sports, dim events and less compliant portraiture subjects. I have no clue how easy or annoying it will be for you, to live with EVF lag and subject tracking interupted by last picture preview in there..

 

I'll want an EOS R too, to avoid AF fine tuning, especially since the 5D IV isn't Magic Lantern supported, to benefit from eye AF and to use Canon's awesome LV AF conveniently with a flippy screen.

My suggestion would be to try the R however, preferably with / on a friend, capable of lunges towards you &/ gesticulation grimaces.

 

I think the 5D IV is a really nice DSLR. Only thing I am missing is an easily accessible AF modes switch and automated AF micro adjustment support.. If you are drilled to back button focus, you might be fine with it. OTOH your use case doesn't sound in bad need of frame rate and low light capable AF. - What about the 2nd card slot?

 

Make up your mind about the battery issue. - If your travels are extremely unplugged, it might matter, otherwise it shouldn't. - To me traveling means something like 2 rolls on a wilder day, a bit different from events covering machine gunnery.

Touristic shots of great printed quality can be taken with every current camera - APS or FF. Even low-end Olympus E-M10 family.

You want a new body and indicated that if you buy on R, you expect to use an adapter with your current EF lenses. You also indicated an interest in landscape, architecture, and macro.

 

Given that, I think the suggestions of an R 50/1.2 and 28-70/2 don’t answer your question. Those two lenses together weigh 2380 g, which is a lot to lug around, and cost US $5,300, which is a lot more than either of the bodies you are considering.

 

Either will produce superb images. The issues, IMHO, are the trade offs in features and ergonomics. It would be helpful if you could get your hands in the R And either 5 D iii or iv to see which you prefer.

I highly recommend the 5DS R, especially for landscape, architecture and macro. I actually use mine for sports too, which was not my intent, but the image quality is superior to the two 25MP crop bodies that I have been using.

Touristic shots of great printed quality can be taken with every current camera - APS or FF. Even low-end Olympus E-M10 family.

 

I concur with this viewpoint.

I have many issues with photography - - -most (if not all) are behind the viewfinder.

 

Having said that. . . having great equipment makes it *easier* to get better shots. I never cease to be amused at struggling to take a lowlight shot with a DSLR and an image stabilized F4.0 lens. . .only to have some yahoo come up beside for two seconds with an iPhone and yell "got it!".

 

Yeah. . . .no. . . they didn't get it.

 

So I am in the same boat. . . I have a pile of EF lenses; and an APS-C body. I like "travel" and "landscape" and "architectural".

My view:

*The new mirrorless sounds sexy. . .but I read about too many issues. The lenses are crazy expensive. Sure. . . you can do adaptors. . . but won't you feel like you are missing out by not getting the new lenses? Even though they cover the same ranges you probably have now?

* I shoot a canon P&S alongside my DSLR - - -> frankly, there is no substitute for a DSLR viewfinder.

* I have no doubt mirrorless is the future. Not today. I am *personally* thinking one more DSLR body before I jump to the mirrorless world. Yes. . . lense preinvestment is influencing that decision.

 

* Frankly, weight is not a factor for me. BUT. . .I do notice that carrying around a collection of zooms and a DSLR in a camera bag *all day* on my back really does weigh me down and make me crabby. ESPECIALLY, if I have need for the 100-400. Carry that for two days straight, walking for hours on end - - -and I am ready to chuck it all into the sea. I find that I like to limit myself to three lenses (10-22; 16-35, 24-105), an APS-C body and a P&S for travelling. I leave the 100-400 in the room most days, unless I have special needs (wildlife; airshows). I debate carrying both the 10-22 and 16-35. . .but I really like the 10; and I really like the 16-35 :) ) Weight of the day-bag is one of two reasons I have not jumped on a T/S lens for architectural shots

 

* I occasionally think about the $5000 in camera gear I am walking around with in sketchy neighborhoods at night. . . but I am careful not to tell the other half the actual *replacement value* of the bag. The cost of the T/S lenses is the second reason I have not added one to my bag. . .just puts the value on my back too high when playing tourist.

 

So someone asked for an opinion: In 2019 - - > I would get the 5D-IV. And do get the 11-24/4L with it- - -> going crazy wide should be 1/3 of the reason to go Full Frame (afterall, the 10-22/EF-S won't work on 5D).

In your shoes I'd probably get the EOS R. You can use all your EF lenses on it seamlessly, so why not? You can also look out for the new R lenses and pick and choose as they appear. 5DIV is better for fast moving sports. but otherwise they seem equivalent, but with the extra mirrorless features that might be handy.