DavidPhares Loc: Chandler, Arizona

I currently own, and use, a Canon 5D Mk IV, and several L quality lenses. I am happy with what I produce, and I enjoy the editing of my images.

After reading all I can find on Canon’s mirrorless cameras, I am still at a loss as to why I should “upgrade” to one of the mirrorless offerings.

Any suggestions?

David in Arizona

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Who said an EOS R5 was an upgrade from an EOS 5DIV? If you don't sell all your EF lenses and convert to the even better RF versions, you get a bit more pixel resolution but little in the way of image quality difference. Didn't you ask the same question last summer?

DavidPhares Loc: Chandler, Arizona

Thank you. Maybe I am not as dumb as some of my friends suspect? 😃

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

I shoot an EOS 5DIII, two 22MP bodies I rarely use together, mostly just swap every 6 months, both over 100,000 each in shutter count. I promised I'd get 10-years use out of each. I added a Sony a7II (24MP) a few years ago to use my even older FD lenses. There's a subtle cropping difference of those additional 2MP, something I can really see as a benefit of the 5DIV's 30MP or the R5 45MP. I've also started to 'miss' the EVF of the Sony when out with the EOS DSLR, the 10x zoom in the view finder and the EVF image review, especially in the bright sun where the LCD is next to impossible to see.

If you look at the lens reviews, the RF lenses are clearly visually superior to the already great EF lenses. Here's where a body alone will yield more pixels and EVF will give some shooting features, but neither will yield the phenomenal difference (and expense) of changing all your lenses.

To tide myself over as I run out the 10-year clock, I role-play which lenses to change to RF given I need to keep a few EF for my EOS film body. A year or two after these R5/R6 releases should pass to iron out the bugs too.

tramsey Loc: Texas

It sounds like you have things well in hand. I am going to prediced that in two years you are going to have a GAS attack like you've never had before and dump all your canon equipment for the latest Sony. Two years my friend, two years max

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Hi Judge. I am a model railroader in addition to being a photographer. Many years ago (between 30 and 40). we saw a huge shift in what was the top-end for model locomotives. The gold standard for probably almost 50 years had been exquisite models made from cast and sheet brass and hand assembled in various small factories in Japan, then in other locations in southeast Asia (primarily South Korea). These models could be designed and built as accurate representations of specific prototypes, using detailed castings and mostly standard soldering techniques, and could readily be built in very small lots (maybe 100 or 200 units or so). The importers, who handled research, cooperated with the factories on design, and resold to domestic hobby shops, were almost exclusively small businesses, sometimes sole propriertorships with maybe one or two employees. There was a sort of competition, but it was from a couple or three much larger companies whose products were substantially less accurate models produced in huge quantities for "average" model railroaders at much lower costs and retail prices. A typical price for a brass model was $300 or more (sometimes much more), while the plastic models were generally in the $30 range or so...some more, some a little less.

As our hobby was shrinking at that time, one of the large companies got the notion to consolidate the entire market. They eliminated the low price, low end market and developed a line of models that utilized an enhanced injection molding process to allow for improved detail and also allowed molds to be made quicker and at a slightly lower cost by sacrificing mold life. These models were made in shorter runs, with less variety than had been available in brass. The result was the pretty much forced retirement of the folks who had been providing the brass models,, which are much less available today. Oh...the price of these new models, in equivalent dollars at the time, was generally $100-125. Nowadays, similar models of this type are around $200 before optional items are added (like electronic control systems).

You can imagine what happened over time. These big companies used their resources to advertise heavily in an attempt to make everyone believe that life was "Better" somehow. Are the new models better? Not really. They are OK, but the only real benefit, aside from a slightly lower price point, is that they are optimized for what is called "command control," a way of managing model train movement that is sort of like matrix metering. I have two of them, because they happened to be models that I was interested in. Still waiting for maybe a couple of others some day in the future. New hobbyists can't really afford to enter the hobby now. Those who are left are mainly the "technogeeks." Modelling articles in magazines are all about getting wiring correct and using the command control systems for new and unexpected purposes. There is some discussion of doing accurate modeling, but the basics of economics justifying a railroad and operating techniques are mostly missing.

I tell you this story to emphasize that while there are valid cases to seek performance improvement in cameras (better low light performance, better resolution sometimes, etc.), big ballyhooed change campaigns are generally for the manufacturers' benefit, not the consumers'. You are going to have to decide what works for you. I've looked pretty intensely at mirrorless cameras and find that they do not offer me any benefit over what I have. Of course, others here have made completely different choices, and that's OK. And be skeptical of lens and camera reviews. Very few of them will acknowledge which technical changes make a difference and which just look good on paper. Let your needs (or even your wants) drive you, not the advertising, and not the reviews. Finally, I'm a little bit jealous. The Desert Botanical Garden is one of my favorite places, just not right now. Too hot.

tgreenhaw

Everyone's reason to upgrade will be different as there are so many variables.

If price is important, nothing is less expensive with using what you have. (your tools sound awesome)

I can tell you why I'm interested in upgrading. Some of my reasons may fit your needs so here goes.

I don't like carrying a huge backpack full of gear everywhere. This means I need a camera that will serve as many of my needs as possible.

I have a 5Ds, Rp, 100-400L (A), 35mm f1.4 L(B), 24-72L(C), 85mm 1.4 L(D), 24-240 superzoom (E) and a 10-18 EF-S (F).

I like to print large aluminum prints, e.g. 24X30 so I need at least 40 mega pixels and headroom to crop on smaller sizes or change in orientation.

I shoot a very wide variety of subjects, wildlife(A), plants (A & C), landscapes (B), travel/street photography (C&E), portraits (D), indoor low light (B & D) and occasionally sports (A & C depending on location) & real estate (C&F). I even hook up with my 8" telescope and an old Edmund Scientific microscope on occasion.

I am shooting a lot more video lately. Shooting video on the 5Ds is a pain in the ass. You have to use the rear LCD and its hard to see and in bright light it barely doable. Also, image stabilization for video isn't that good with the 5Ds so I have to live with a gimbal which I use and dislike. Video is why I replaced my 70D with the Rp and the superzoom. The Rp is good enough for the type of video I shoot, 4K or less and normal frame rates, and the 24-240 gives me a flexible walkabout do anything camera with acceptable image quality. I still use a tripod mostly when shooting video and when I travel I have to carry both bodies and the lenses I anticipate using. Frankly I'm tired of carrying around 40 lbs of stuff.

The Rp mirrorless camera offers several things I don't like living without anymore. It's like a car with a backup camera; I never had it before, but now that I have one I'll never buy a car without a backup camera. I'm not going to replace the car to get a backup camera, but the new one better have it. Same goes for mirrorless. In low light conditions the electronic viewfinder is bright. I can easily see a depth of focus preview with the expected exposure. This is critical with the 85MM f1.4. When I focus manually, the electronic viewfinder automatically magnifies and highlights with focus peaking so I get excellent focus on subjects AF doesn't choose correctly, e.g. the bird in the bush. I have an EF to RF adaptor with an extra control ring. I use this to control ISO so I don't need to take my eye away from the viewfinder to set aperture, shutter, ISO and focus. I know people say that an optical viewfinder works better in low light; they must not own both because its simply not the case with what I have. I have more flexibility to program what is in the viewfinder on the Rp. The remote live shooting view operation with the Rp is much easier for me to use as well and this is helpful when shooting a lot on the tripod, portraits, or especially the telescope & microscope.

The R5 has the resolution I need. Unlike the Rp its more rugged. It has all the advantages of both my current bodies rolled into one and every capability is superior to what I currently have. As I shoot more and more video, the R5 should allow me to take shots that can't do with the Rp. With the 8 stop IBIS and my IS lenses, I won't like need to hardly ever battle the gimbal and I won't always carry the tripod anymore for stills or video.

I plan to sell my 5Ds and Honda Motorcycle sometime in the next year and use the $ for the R5 and a better wide angle lens.

BebuLamar

The only reason is because it has no mirror. If you like camera with mirror then there is no reason.

bleirer

I would not upgrade if I were you. That is a mighty fine camera you have there. When it is long in tooth I'd look at the Canon R5.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

If you don’t like what you see in the mirror, don’t blame the mirror.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

(You should upgrade because they want to sell you a camera... /s )

If you're pleased with the results from what you have, why upgrade?
Just because someone says you should?
Mirrorless is the latest and greatest gee-whiz-bang thing... So some people's opinions say.......
I have absolutely NO desire to obtain one.

Bob Mevis Loc: Plymouth, Indiana

If you're happy with your images from your Canon, then there's no reason to upgrade.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Canon wants you to buy another camera, even if the camera you already have is doing everything you need it to do. If it were up to Canon, the company would have you purchasing a new camera every year, plus multiple lenses to go with each new camera.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

The only reason to “upgrade” is if you just want to. The difference between a DSLR and a mirrorless camera is the way the image gets from the sensor to the SD card.