Hello everyone!

I’m contemplating upgrading to an R5 but was asked to consider an A7R5 as an alternative.

What does the latter have that the former doesn’t?

What would I miss out on if I pick the Canon?

A comprehensive list would be appreciated. Thank you!

Right now I’m leaning towards R5ii over a7rv. I want a camera for extreme macro (insects) as well as wildphotography including birds and birds in flight.

Canon r5 excells in both burst speed (30 vs 10fps), pre shooting buffer and stacked sensor.

• It got also hugher native iso (ir will perform better at lower lights = less noise?)

• Has eye tracking AF (not sure if overal AF is better or not?)

Wheres a7rv supposed to have insect tracking in its AF as well as higher MP (61 vs 45, although 45 is good even after croping)

Overall ai get the idea that a5ii is a much bwtter camera that also cost less. Am I thinking wrong here? Also I read everywhere that canon have less lens alternative due to no 3rd party support. I’m not very good in the field of lenses but shouldnt canons own lenses be enough? are they worse in a way or whats the problem?

If I was you, what would you do? which camera would you go with and why? Thanks in advance 🙏🏼

Hi All,

I’m new here and currently shoot with Olympus OMD EM1 mark ii and couple of their pro glasses for the past 7 years. I really enjoyed the MFT system especially, the form factor and the computational photography aspects of it. When I started bird photography recently the low light performance of MFT has bothered me enough to think about switching to FF.

I have used canon T1i & 6D mark ii before Olympus. But most of the instagram accounts I follow seem to be using Sony and I love the Sony design. It just looks glamorous. Doing more research on AF & other aspects I have settled on Sony A7R V or Canon R5 mark II. I know mark ii isn’t announced yet but there are enough rumors that it will launch this year and I’m in no hurry.

My use case is 50-50 on wildlife and landscape. 80-20 on photo and video.

Pros for canon:

1. 100-500 lens is compact and light weight compared to Sonys 200-600

2. Mark ii being slightly newer model

3. 20 FPS compared to Sonys 10 FPS

Pros for Sony:

1. Likely cheaper compared to canon. Both the body and lens together is 5400$ compared to 6400$ canon.

2. Personally like Sony design

3. Pixel shift hires images

Given this, what would you guys recommend based on your personal experience.

Thanks for all the replies and helpful feedback.