Thanks for your insight. Other than having bragging rights "mine's bigger than your's RE: resolution," I'm beginning to realize that the R6 is a heck of a lot of bang for the buck. I'm sure if I needed to do major cropping the R5 would be much better than the R6, but for most of what I would be shooting and the amount of cropping I would do, the R6 would be more than up to the task it seems. I'm not a pixel peeper, but I could see an advantage to the R5 if you really needed to crop aggressively. I'm not a big video shooter so the differences there are not even a consideration for me.

The emotional me would love to have the R5 just because it has 45 MP, but the practical me is saying that the R6 is a more logical choice given my shooting history. The money I would save, not just on the camera but also on the cost of CFe cards and the required reader, would go a long way toward getting some rally nice RF glass. Based on fact that you could not tell which of my images was shot with the 5DIV and which with the 6D (30MP vs 20MP) even though both images were cropped a good amount, suggests to me that 20MP is more than enough for 95% of what I would shoot. Thanks for sharing your images.

For the records, the picture of the Hawk was shot with the 5D Mark IV while the image of the sparrow on the feeder was shot with the 20MP 6D. Even when I zoom in on the sparrow's eye, the image looks more than acceptable IMHO.

Thanks for sharing your real-world experience. As it happens, I had a 6D before I upgraded to the 5D4 and your post got me thinking - why not go back and look at similar images from both cameras and do some cropping to assess how much difference in image degradation there might be between the 6D and 5D4 when cropped by the same amount. Since the 6D is also 20MP (like the R6) perhaps that will give me an idea of what the R6 IQ might be like (though I'm guessing the 20MP sensor in the R6 is much better than the 20MP sensor in the older 6D?)

By the way, my main reasons for considering moving to an R6 (or "maybe" R5) are 1) for the IBIS and 2) what I understand is an amazing dual pixel AF system with eye/face tracking and 3) the incredible shutter speeds compared to the 5D4. I am VERY aware that technically the R5 would be a better camera overall (a good friend has one) and I could crop more aggressively, but truth be told, I don't often crop that aggressively, preferring instead to use a lens appropriate to the task. Would I love to have the R5? Of course but, being retired and on a fixed income, I'm having a hard time with the notion of plopping down nearly $4,000 for an R5 without any RF glass when I could get the R6 WITH a decent 24-105 f4 RF lens for $300 less than the R5 body alone. I also like the idea of having two identical card slots and not needing to invest in yet another card system (CF express), which adds additional expense.

I'm attaching four images, two of which were taken with the 20MP 6D (one full sized and one cropped the equivalent of 100% zoom). The other two images were taken with the 30MP 5D4. In both sets the ISO was 100 and the lens was a Canon 300m Prime shot at f4. Without cheating and looking at image dimensions, just from viewing the images, can you tell which set was taken with the 6D and which were with the 5D4?

Thanks for sharing your real-world experience. As it happens, I had a 6D before I upgraded to the 5D4 and your post got me thinking - why not go back and look at similar images from both cameras and do some cropping to assess how much difference in image degradation there might be between the 6D and 5D4 when cropped by the same amount. Since the 6D is also 20MP (like the R6) perhaps that will give me an idea of what the R6 IQ might be like (though I'm guessing the 20MP sensor in the R6 is much better than the 20MP sensor in the older 6D?)

By the way, my main reasons for considering moving to an R6 (or "maybe" R5) are 1) for the IBIS and 2) what I understand is an amazing dual pixel AF system with eye/face tracking and 3) the incredible shutter speeds compared to the 5D4. I am VERY aware that technically the R5 would be a better camera overall (a good friend has one) and I could crop more aggressively, but truth be told, I don't often crop that aggressively, preferring instead to use a lens appropriate to the task. Would I love to have the R5? Of course but, being retired and on a fixed income, I'm having a hard time with the notion of plopping down nearly $4,000 for an R5 without any RF glass when I could get the R6 WITH a decent 24-105 f4 RF lens for $300 less than the R5 body alone. I also like the idea of having two identical card slots and not needing to invest in yet another card system (CF express), which adds additional expense.

I'm attaching four images, two of which were taken with the 20MP 6D (one full sized and one cropped the equivalent of 100% zoom). The other two images were taken with the 30MP 5D4. In both sets the ISO was 100 and the lens was a Canon 300m Prime shot at f4. Without cheating and looking at image dimensions, just from viewing the images, can you tell which set was taken with the 6D and which were with the 5D4?

I currently have a 5D Mark IV (My tele lenses include a Canon 70-200 f4, 300 f4 Prime and a Sigma 150-600 Zoom).

While I love the 5DIV, I am pretty much certain that I want to move to mirrorless but am torn (agonizing is more accurate) between going for the Canon R6 or spending another $1400+ (plus more $$ for CFe cards and a CFe reader) for the R5.

My biggest concern is having 10MP less with the R6 compared to the 5D4 and whether the additional MP of the R5 is worth the rather hefty additional expense (remember it's not just the additional $1400 for the camera, but also the added expense of using CFe cards compared to SD cards).

I know that more pixels on the R5 means I can crop in more and retain IQ, but in practical real-life situations, how often would that be an issue and how much difference will it really make in practical terms.

Of course if the R6 had just a tad more MP (like even 24),that would make the decision a little easier. But going down to 20Mp from 30MP is a hard pill to swallow, if only psychologically, but at the same time justifying more than $1400 + additional CFe card/ reader costs for the R5 is also psychologically a hard pill.

I do like the fact that the R6 uses the same cards in both slots whereas the R5 uses two different card types (I hate that about my 5D4). Aside from the MP and some increased video capability (which isn't that important to me) it seems the two are very comparable when comparing all other features.

I guess the real question would be how much I can still crop in with the R6 before seeing any noticeable degradation of IQ?

I have read lots of comparisons and watched a ton of "comparison videos" but wanted to hear from hogs here who have moved from the 5DIV to the R6 specifically. I still don't have a good feel for whether giving up those 10MP would make enough of a difference to warrant the additional expense of an R5. Have any hogs moved from the 5D4 to the R6 (I'm specifically not asking about the R5 in this post - I know it would be "better" than the R6) and what has your real world experience been regarding whether 20MP is "enough" in most situations.

It seems you have the range covered in what you like to photograph with your current lenses. Have you tried to learn post processing techniques which will improve your photos such as sharpening and doesn't cost much? Try downloading free trials of Lightroom or the one I use is On1. You can find tutorials in how to sharpen or the many other ways to improve your photographs with these products online.

The current version of On1 is even on sale currently for $50.

https://www.on1.com/products/photo-raw/buy/?coupon=SUMMER

So here we go. I absolutely love photography, but I am a complete amature. I'm slowly learning, and some of my results ain't half bad, (the other half are terrible by the way), lol. Anyway, I currently own a Canon T7i, which I realize is not the latest, greatest piece of equipment out there, but it's the best I could afford at the time, and I am on an extremely limited budget. I have the two "kit lenses" that were supplied with the camera, 18-55 efs, and a 55-250 efs. Both have served me reasonably well, but I'm somewhat disappointed with the lack of quality /sharpness, and would like to add another lens to what I already have. There's nothing in particular that I regularly shoot, just whatever happens to catch my eye in the moment.
So here's the question, which I'm sure some of you may find amusing. Could any of you suggest what could be a good choice for my next lens? I really don't know what I'm asking for. As I said, I'm on a VERY limited budget so I have no problem buying used. I'd just like something sharper, that has some versatility (some kind of zoom perhaps)? I also am not concerned about the brand, although I'd prefer it to be compatible without the need for adapters.
Any advice would be hugely appreciated, and I apologize for what is probably a dumb question for most of you. Thank you in advance everyone, and please stay safe and have a great day, all the best,
Ray.

Hello everyone, I am about to embark into a brand new genre of photography, "nude photography".. A few days ago a client ask me to do a nude shoot of her at her home, going so far as to tel me not to be shy about touching her anywhere to position her body, and, to make the photos hot and sexy. She indicated that she want to do this, starting off in her kitchen, working our way into the living room, and finally ending up in her bedroom, to where at the very end she wants to oil up her body for final shots too. This is all very new to me; I have been doing research on doing nude shoots, but have had a hard time finding articles describing various poses that would be optimum for this kind of shoot, so am appealing to any one out here who may have experience in this arena, if you might be so kind as to enlighten me on the finer points of how this should go. Thank you for your time..