I was set on buying a Sony A7rV for the longest time. I had forgot that Canon was releasing so many models around the same time. With the holidays approaching I'm thinking about pulling the trigger. I'm not currently involved in either system. Can someone explain to me like I'm 5 how I should compare and contrast these cameras? I don't use video whatsoever.

Edit: I should've included what I photograph.

Landscape- heavily if/when traveling. Wildlife- heavily. Street- heavily. Sports- auto events and some other fast paced subjects from time to time (I've learned to be successful with low fps, so while higher is nicer, i don't "need" it). Portraits- hardly but not never. Low light capabilities would help but i could also have a separate camera for that purpose like a sony a9iii. No studio work. No video. When traveling or going out to shoot i tend to go into cities and into the country/ nature more so than "events" and as i said, never studio work.

Thanks

I have an R8 and have had plenty of thoughts surrounding the desire for the higher 45 MP. I will be upgrading camera bodies in September and have been mainly considering the R3 or the R5, and I'm currently leaning towards the R3. I currently shoot exclusively with EF L-series glass.

I should also explain that though this has primarily been an expensive hobby (it's funny because it's true), I am also now getting into paid shoots. However, my main focus is the love of the art, and not as a primary source of income.

My main interest is shooting people; I've recently shot a niece's engagement, wedding and reception; a nephew's Prom photos of 5 couples, family photos, portraits, etc. This all obviously had me leaning towards the R5. And I honestly have been quite satisfied with results of the 24 MP on the R8, but I have a friend who has an R5 and I do of course see the benefits of being able to crop/zoom in, larger prints and whatnot.

However, I have also recently gotten into sports photography since I currently have three young teenagers (one daughter, two sons) who are and will continue to be in sports for at least the next 5 years (swim team, basketball, baseball/softball, lacrosse, football/flag, volleyball), which ultimately is leaning me towards the R3.

So for the moment, my conclusion is that the R3 gives me the best of both worlds in regards to what I shoot. I was hoping that the R5II would be an improvement where I could use it adequately for sports, to essentially be an upgraded R3 with 45 MP.

And I have even considered splurging and getting an R1, but with 24 MP, at the moment I would rather go with an R3. My primary hesitation on spending the extra cash for an R1 is my disappointment in it not being, in my opinion, truly a "flagship", meaning that it doesn't have the literal best of all options. I'm thinking 45 MP, Global shutter, 40 fps electronic, 120 fps burst, limitless buffer or near to it, etc.

Admittedly, I need to read up more, and watch more review videos about the R5II and the R1. I would genuinely appreciate input about these two new behemoths, the good and the bad, thoughts for or against, and then please specifically if you believe the R1 is worth the extra cost to be considered over the R3.

Do you think the R5II would be a good consideration for sports? Or should I stick to the R3?

Or possibly the R1...?

Thanks in advance!

Hi guys!

I’m looking to switch from Nikon D850 to Canon for multiple reasons but I’m curious which of the three cams above has the BEST autofocus and suits my work of feeld.

I shoot events fulltime from festivals/artists to big congresses and dark techno clubs so I’m willing to pay the premium to improve my workflow since getting the right shot can be crucial. I don’t care about video nor which camera has the fastest shutter or burst speed so no billion fps needed.

Thanks in advance!!

Looking to upgrade to mirrorless and debating between the R3 body or R5 Mark II body. Currently only about $400 price difference but wasnt sure if Canon will be releasing anything comparable new before the end of the year.

Anyone mess with both and have a preference?

Shooting concerts (low light), portrait events, real estate, and construction. Mostly photos but occasionally video. R3 video goes up to 6k, while R5II gets to 8k.

The body size and feel will be something I got to get used to with the R3 as I've been a dual t6i shooter for over a decade.

I went all in with mirrorless, selling my dslr's when the R3 came out and was waiting for an R1 for a long time. Everyone was kind of expecting something more from it, myself included. I just wish it had a 32-35 mp sensor and MAYBE a global shutter, but it really does seem like the R5 has everything the R1 does and a little more. The only thing stopping me from getting the R5 is the smaller body, no touch AF controller, the overheating (even with the battery grip vent), and the LP E6 Batteries (they just aren't that good compared to LP E19's). I also used the original R5 and returned it after a few weeks because it kind of fell short. I do a lot of weddings, more video than photos sometimes, so the video features are nice, but the R1 would have been my main shooter for both photo and video but again, it just feels like a R3 update. Getting the R5, plus the vent grip, PLUS 8 BATTERIES (all the old LP E6's wont be as good) it would be $1,000 less than the R1 too. Money isn't the issue for since it's for work, but dude I really agree with the sentiment that it doesn't FEEL like a flagship body, especially when compared to Sony or Nikon. I already have my pre order for the R1 in since last night, but I've never second guessed myself on camera gear ever. Maybe someone here can help me make up my mind.

Edit: thanks to those who were helpful, not so much to those who weren’t. Cancelled my r1 order in favor of the r5. Losing some nice photo features in favor of video features. It is what it is.