I take adoption photos for a local no-kill cat and kitten rescue. The shoots take place indoors, usually in the felines’ enclosures where they feel the most comfortable. These pens are about 3-1/2 feet wide, 8 feet deep, and 8 feet high, with a variety of cat trees, ramps, and sleeping shelves at different heights. Lighting can vary from bright, diffuse sunlight near the windows and doors to shadowy in places.

For the last two years, I’ve been using a Canon 5D Mark IV for these sessions, and it has performed admirably. It’s a great indoor camera, and it has felt like an extension of my hand and eye from the start. (I’d previously used a 7D and a 90D.) I always said that I would probably never own anything better, and I was quite happy to believe that. Then came the R5.

I debated long and hard over that R5, lured by its animal eye AF capability, in-body image stabilization (since I’m not getting younger or steadier), and its articulating rear screen. But would it really be worth buying the R5 when I was so happy with my 5D? I didn’t really need the extra megapixels since I don’t do any large format printing. Most of my photos are shared in social media.

I decided to give it a try anyway.

I had my first cat/kitten shoot with it yesterday, and – wow! Yeah, it was worth it.

The animal eye AF was magical. It left me much freer to concentrate on composition and, coupled with AI Servo mode, took the worry out of tracking the sometimes fast-moving kittens in action while keeping their eyes sharply in focus. When a kitten turned its head and the AF-captured eye disappeared, the camera instantly locked onto the eye that was still in view. It’s not perfect, and I did miss some shots, but not many. My “keeper” ratio was definitely higher with the R5.

The in-body image stabilization, coupled with the IS in the lens, allowed me to shoot at slower shutter speeds, reducing ISO and image noise.

Just as helpful as the animal eye AF was the articulated rear screen. That was a feature I had missed on the 5D and, while I’d compensated as well as I could, having it on the R5 made a big difference. I could shoot kittens at or near floor level without risking my back, and I could photograph the mother cats, who usually prefer to sleep on the highest shelf at arm’s length above my head, without trying to climb on anything.

Would the R5 have been worth the price if I wasn’t doing this kind of photography? In my case, probably not. My other shooting takes place outdoors in daylight – birds, wildlife, and nature photography in general. For that, I have a Sony RX10-IV that does just as good a job with far less weight penalty. (On the 5D and R5, I have to carry a heavy Tamron 150-600 mm lens to get the same reach, at the sacrifice of wide-angle capability).

But for shooting indoors at the cat rescue? Yes, the R5 is better. I’m afraid my beloved 5D is probably facing early retirement.

This image was taken with a Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L at 1/250 sec, f/10, 35mm, ISO 4000.

Welcome to the R-5 it is in my opinion the best all around camera body in it's class.
You made the best decision, but if you think the body is amazing than just wait until you acquire some RF L glass for it. The RF L glass is world class, not to knock the R6 in any way, or EF glass. But if you have a camera that accepts RF mount, then by all means sell all your lens for RF glass. The L series RF is very expensive but if you knew prices of comparable quality lenses in the "80's" you would have paid upwards of $10.000 for the same quality lens the RF-L glass gives you now at $3000. Thats the facts you don't hear much on here. But as a veteran professional photographer for over 40yrs I couldn't be happier with Cannon's RF mount and fantastic world class glass. Do yourself a favor and rent the 50mm 1.2L and 85mm 1.4L even the 24 to 105L and decide for yourself. (If you don't own any yet). The 28-70 1.4L is also one to behold.