Leaderboard

I think it’s great. Another camera that could have been great but isn’t so I have utterly zero interest in and therefore will not be spending any money on. Keep it up camera industry, you are doing good and keeping my money firmly in my bank account 🫡

I am thinking full frame sensor is pretty bad for telephoto work at such long focal lengths. You are carrying much heavier glass and cropping into the sensor, aka not making the most of full frame - so you'd be far better off with a Micro Four Thirds camera for that. I am confused with your need for a fully articulating selfie screen at 750mm too 🙂 The R5C has worse AF for video. What about R5 II? Might be worth a look. I'd be tempted to go original R5 and a different camera for your telephoto shots, with a high-res crop sensor.

Haha... maybe things are a little different for me as I have both ADHD and ASD so my brain sees details rather then summaries. Lot's of Macro photographers tend to be on the Autism Spectrum for this reason. Probably why so many people got confused with what I'm trying to achieve, as sadly communication is different too as there are subtleties. I'm kind of leaning towards the R5C at this point but a little lost over the lens lineup. I wrote above what my thoughts are as I want to cover my bases and not leave anything out since at this point I don't have any experience as I've never done anything like this before. So what focal lengths will I need? Time will tell basically..... Sure for stills currently based on what is available where I live; I use the 15-30mm Pentax and 150mm Irix, the 200-500 f5.6 Nikkor, and Sigma 105mm - though prior to the 15-30mm I used the Samyang 24mm F1.4 which got crazy internal reflections at brilliant points of light. Just checking the Canon website I can see a CN-18-80mm and 70-200mm which probably would cover me on all bases but sadly these are Super 35mm E-mount lenses, so not even full frame. Something like the RF 24-240mm would be ideal as a one-stop-shop for a lens but I made that mistake with my Nikon already in the 18-300mm DX. It's awful and heavily compromised for my liking. Good for "snaps" though, great recon lens :-S I guess I made my decision on camera body, now for the lenses....??

When I had the camera, I basically just left it on A. Even when shooting on a Mediterranean island in the height of summer. I find that when documenting real life stuff, the 180 shutter rule is a bit more maliable than when shooting for narrative or performance. In fact, I would go so far as to say for a protest, having a very fast shutter speed can even be advantageous as things move so quickly. You can pull crisp stills from your footage and any noticeable choppyness in the shots will emphasis the electric feeling of actually being there. With A you can just focus on framing and let the camera do the exposing. It will play with ISO and shutter speed, but keep you aperture locked to whatever you set it.

Right. These days, you can pick one of Sony, Canon, Nikon, and Panasonic (and arguably, Fuji) and have everything you need. Beyond that, you're really just micro-optimizing in ways that are less meaningful than you might think. Most of them just take turns buying the same Sony sensors anyway. Each has some things that they do better than the others - and if you change your mind later about the things that are important, you could certainly regret it. But at some point, obsession over small differences between systems will lead to making a YouTube channel with a theme song about "All I want is the perfect camera, all I want is the perfect ca-me-ra..." (FWIW, Kasey is borderline convinced for the time being that his R5 II is the closest thing to a perfect camera and he also likes taking photo/videos of birds/squirrels in his local area). Am I actually suggesting that someone watch Camera Conspiracies for actual information about buying cameras for their use case? I can't believe I'm saying this, but... maybe I am.

Makes perfect sense, especially when traveling

What is your planned presentation/use for these photos? One of the not-so-secret secrets of wildlife photography is that the photos are rarely presented as-framed in camera. The D500 has 20 megapixels which gives you a bit of room to crop in if your presentation is going to be social media or embedded in a 4k video. The Z8 and R5C are both 45 megapixel sensors - so you'll be able to crop in even more than on the D500. An 800mm lens won't be meaningfully different in FOV on FF than your 500mm was on APS-C, though. You mention the built-in TC on the 200-800, but there's nothing stopping you from going out and getting a 1.4x TC for the lens that you have now... or a 2x, but on modern very high resolution sensors, I've never seen a 2x TC that looked better than just cropping. If you don't want to crop or if you want to shoot 4K for presentation at 4K, you really should be looking at APS-C or M43 cameras. Bonus, you can also still use a TC.

That all depends - if you have a 61 megapixel FF sensor, the only real benefit to it is the ability to crop in. Much heavier glass is also subjective - I kind of love the Canon RF 800mm f/11. It's obviously very limiting to have a fixed f/11 aperture, but the lens is otherwise a decent performer and not that different from using a 400mm lens at f/5.6 on M43. I would say, though, that stabilization is huge at such long focal lengths - and that might be a reason to consider a Panasonic body and Panasonic lens since their hybrid IS is by far the best. I don't have much problem getting sharp photos on the R5 with the 800/11 since whatever mix of IS is used works pretty well - but I also only use it in fairly bright areas and I don't mind bumping up the ISO a little bit.

There are no riots in Los Angeles. Get your information from a real news source.

I got really excited for a second when I saw the EVF but that A7IV sensor is a buzzkill. For a video first camera I can't get around the 26ms rolling shutter. Unless you shoot static shots, this is just bad performance. I also find it insane Sony is still not offering resolution above 4K or internal RAW in 2025. For 3200€ I find that unforgiving considering you can get a used/grey FX3 for around that price. Not even going to mention the competition options. Don't get me wrong, this is still a very solid hybrid camera with some worthy improvements but I'd still pick FX3 over it unless you absolutely need an EVF and even then an A7S3 would probably still give you a better image, especially low-light. Sony is still doing one step forward, two steps back.

R5C got some solid updates including AF. I find it actually way superior to Nikon Z8/Z9. Smoother, more reliable tracking. Less pulsing/hunting. Nikon AF can sometimes trip or get confused but Z lenses do offer minimal breathing which is nice. The main catch with R5C is no IBIS and average battery life. If you can live with those two cons it's a better hybrid in my opinion. Grading N-log is also more time consuming than C-log.

£1299 in the UK. $1299 would be the original US pricing without Trump's madness. So the tariffs are adding $400 onto a $1299 camera body. All of it into the pockets of a fascist administration rather than a nice Japanese camera company, too. Ouch.

I have one on the way after looking at the image samples here: https://www.gsmarena.com/xiaomi_14_ultra-review-2683p5.php The 75mm F1.8 lens in particular... Like some of the famous Zeiss Distagons it has a floating element to get close. With such a fast aperture in combination with the close-focussing abilities make it look incredible. The 14 Ultra in fact has two such lenses, a 75mm and 120mm. And the main imager is 1" Which also in the close-to-mid focus range has a very shallow DOF. I have lighted tweaked that last one in Pixelmator Pro, the JPEGs have a surprising amount of chonkiness to play with. Then there's the RAW capabilities... With Motion Cam Pro there's the RAW Cinema DNG recording. Within Xiaomi's own camera app is the expert RAW mode for stills, with Leica's colour tuning. This allows you to completely turn off any noise reduction and sharpening... one of the main caveats of modern smartphones. I think at £600 used this is the real deal. The 15 Ultra doesn't change things very much, indeed to go any better would require a big leap. We're talking at least Micro Four Thirds size sensor instead of 1", and F1.4 maximum aperture. And to make this pocketable is going to require a lot of physics bending. There are some other options like the Oppo Find 7 Ultra, and Vivo X100 Pro which have a large 1/1.4" sensor on the telephoto lens, 200MP. But the lens quality itself is a bit compromised as a result. The Vivo X100 Pro has the Zeiss modes, Zeiss lens simulations, even RAW video built into the main camera app I believe. But I find Xiaomi's image processing with Leica to be the best of the bunch. Looking forward to when it turns up from CEX this weekend with the photography kit which gives it ability to use filters and a proper shutter release button! I think for street photography requiring stealth, 3 lenses in one pocket and very high speed, this is a better choice than a proper camera, X100 VI or Leica Q. The ultimate shot getter?

Have an 11 Ultra since it came out and it does provide wonderful image quality in MotionCam and McPro24Fps. Three things makes photography a difficult task on it though; For street photography I need an app that opens fast and captures fast (preferably the native camera app) 1. When you select 5x in the camera app it crops into the main sensor instead of switching to the native zoom sensor. You have to zoom to 10x and then to 5x again to fix it, every time. 2. The audio clips even at low levels and concerts can't be recorded at all for example. 3. The processing is bad on the native app and has a lot of smoothing and way too much contrast. So raw is really the only option. None of these was fixed for it. Considering the 15 Ultra and it does seem much better in most respects, but I'm not sure I trust Xiaomi after all this. GCam looks great on it though, if it´s fast enough. Anybody has any input on how 14/15 Ultra is to use in practice? The images in this thread does look great.

I considered the same dilemma myself a few months ago and it boiled down to this: My need for pro-video features = less, I am a purist when it comes to shooting moving images - no peaking, no zebra, no elaborate extras, no clutter on screen, I have very basic audio needs, far more need for a fast operating nimble camera that can switch quickly between the highest possible video specs and nicest possible ergonomics for stills, so for me the EOS R5 was a better deal than R5C, far less money used, it behaves in a more nimble way for smaller scale creative endeavour and filmmaking, with better AF and is a superior stills camera, the overheating aspect is much improved vs the launch, and the hardware was never really limited very much by raw thermals anyway - it was all silly firmware trickery. So I recently went R5, but the mount just doesn't do it for me. With the Nikon Z8 I can use many more adapters, many more of my existing lenses, far more comes off my shelf and is happy on the Z8, especially for stills. So it really boils down to lenses and whether you'd be happy with a normal R5, before considering the Z8 as a step up from that.

1+8 pro with Helios 58mm on a steady tripod, 226mm FF equivalent.

Defocus Test: 1+8 pro with Vega20mm @f2 wide open (78mm FF equivalent) Vs canon 5D3 with Lomo 75mm @f4