Thanks, everyone. This is great information, exactly what I needed to know.

I had a kitten photo shoot on Monday, and the little rascals were so active that I was really wishing for that Eye AF. I typically use only the center AF point on my 5D4, manually locking onto the nearer eye and then quickly recomposing before taking the shot. It works most of the time, but on Monday I was struggling to keep up.

The IBIS sounds awesome, too. I'm not getting any steadier as I get older. I'm assuming you turn off the lens IS when shooting with the R5?

Regarding the EF to RF lens adapter, Walt B. mentioned it being about $100. I see third party adapters in that price range, but the Canon version is $270 on Amazon. Do the third party adapters work as well?

All-in-all, you've convinced me to go for the R5, although it will have to wait until we've paid off some recent expenses. Thanks!

Ah! I hadn't checked into that, but it makes sense. Thanks!

I wonder if your Tamron was front- or back-focusing? I've had to use the AF microadjustment with the Tamron on most of my cameras.

UPDATE: I was just told that AF Microadjustment isn't an option on mirrorless cameras, so please ignore my question.

Thank you, everyone!

Thanks again, CHG_CANON. I really appreciate your comments and your expertise. Lots of good thoughts and information here.

That 100mm macro really is a superb lens.

I have another kitten shoot tomorrow (that sounds terrible, doesn't it?), and I think I'll take your advice and give the 100mm macro another go. I had switched to the 24-105 mainly because it allows me to zoom out and get full-body shots more easily in confined spaces. But the 100mm does let me shoot at slower shutter speeds and larger apertures, and I can also use my macro ring light for shooting into dark, confined spaces like crates and carriers. (Yes, I should be able to do that with the 24-105mm lens, too, except that I misplaced the macro flash adapter ring for that one.) A standard external flash often casts unwanted shadows.

As for the R5 vs 5D question, am I correct in interpreting your overall message as "Stick with the 5DIV as long as you still love it"?

Thanks CHG_CANON. If I went for the R5, I would plan to keep my EF lenses and use the EF-to-R lens adapter, which raises another good question - does that degrade performance or image quality with the R5?

I shoot with the Canon 24-105 mm f/4L, Canon 70-300 f/4-5.6L, Canon 100 mm f/2.8L macro, and Tamron 150-600 mm f/5-6.3 lenses. My shelter photos are usually taken with the 24-105 mm lens in the 70-100 mm range. I typically shoot around f/7.1-8.0 to get the depth of field I like.

I do use ETTR (thanks to you, I should add), and I shoot exclusively in RAW.

I'm not at all unhappy with the 5DIV. I love everything about it, including its low-light performance and relatively low noise, especially compared to the 7D and 7DII I used to use. I just read about the R5 and started wondering and drooling. Self-inflicted GAS attack.

Thanks Resq2. Did you mean the R5 vs the 5D, or were you comparing the R5 and R6? From the specs and Canon's naming convention, I would expect the R6 to be the less capable of the two R models, although I see it does have twice the high ISO range of the R5.

This looks like a nice comparison of the R5 and R6:

https://cameradecision.com/compare/Canon-EOS-R6-vs-Canon-EOS-R5

We used to have a Samy's Camera store here where I could have rented an R5 and tried it out. They were our last camera store, and they left town a couple of years ago. I miss them. I guess I could look for an online rental outlet....

This question is for the Canon 5D Mark IV users here who have bought, tried, or switched to the Canon R5 mirrorless.

What do you think? How well do you like the R5 compared to the 5D, and why? Is the change worth it? How does the R5's EVF compare to the 5D's optical viewfinder?

I love my 5D and often use it for indoor (cat adoption) photos, but I am tempted by what I've read about the R5's low-light capability, animal eye focus, and image stabilization. I have tried mirrorless cameras in the past and currently use a Sony RX10-IV as my "grab and go" camera, but the electronic viewfinder and shutter lag have always sent me back to the 5D.

When I'm not photographing kittens, I mostly do nature, wildlife, and bird photography, often using a Tamron 150-600 mm lens. I've seen some comments here about the Sigma 150-600 mm lens not working well with the R5. Any experiences with the big Tamron on the R5?

Thanks!

You work hard for your photos - and it shows!

In your post-processing, do you do any noise reduction or sharpening in Lightroom before you run the images through Topaz?

Daryl

Paul,

Between your comments and the reviews I've read online, I think I'll wait on the 180 mm. I hope Canon does come out with a new version. Meanwhile, if I need more reach I'll stick with macro extension tubes and one of my longer telephotos. Thanks for the info and advice!

Daryl

Beautiful photos!!

We have a slightly different variety of Orb Weaver here but, like yours, they always fatten up just in time for Halloween. I like to photograph them, too.

Your post gave me a GAS attack, though. I shoot Canon as well, and I have the 100 mm f/2.8 macro lens, which I love to death. It would be nice to have an extra bit of reach, though. That 180 mm lens is tempting.

Very interesting!

Looks like I've accidentally been doing it right. I always swap batteries right after a shoot and recharge the one I've just used, so that all of my batteries are fully charged the next time I need them. I haven't had one (Canon LPE6N) fail yet, and I haven't noticed any changes in capacity from a practical standpoint.

I've tried the 2.0 TC with the 60-600. It's pretty good, but definitely requires a tripod and some patience, at least for me. I haven't tried the 1.4, though.

Have you checked your Tamron 150-600 for front- or back-focusing with your cameras? I've found that I almost always have to do the autofocus microadjustment with a new lens, especially these wide-ranging zooms.

Do you have the G1 or the G2 version? My G1 was okay (not great, but okay) until the AF died, but my G2 has always been remarkably sharp -- right up there with my Canon L lenses.

I agree about the 90D being very grainy, especially compared to the 5D-IV! That's my biggest complaint with the camera. I do like the articulated rear screen for awkward macro situations, though.

Sigma 60-600 mm lens at 328 mm, f/11, 1/1200 second, ISO 4000, on-tripod, Canon 90D. Subject was about 3 feet away.

(Download)

I've had the Sigma 60-600 for about a month now. I use it on both the Canon 5D Mark IV and the 90D. It's a very good lens.

I don't think the Sigma 60-600 is quite as crisp as the Tamron 150-600 G2 (which I used for several years), but I'm still trying to decide about that. Where the 60-600 shines for me, though, is in close-ups. Since I use this lens in the field for nature photography, I never know what subject might appear, or where. With the Tamron, I usually had to take several steps backward, away from a nearby subject, to get it in focus even at the "wide" end of its zoom range.

With the Sigma, though, I can get very close to a subject, maybe as little as a foot away, up to about 300 mm zoom. With that, on the APS-C 90D, I can pretty easily fill the frame with a close-up subject!

If you're using this lens hand-held, you will definitely want to shoot at a high shutter speed. The image stabilizer is great, but I still use a minimum shutter speed of 1/1200 second. (My normal settings with this lens are 1/1200 sec, f/7.1.)

I agree with the suggestion of renting the lens first to try it out before you buy it. It's a heavy beast, noticeably heavier than the Tamron 150-600, which I used to affectionately call "the Boat Anchor." They don't call it the "Bigma" for nothing.

Best of luck!