So why even get an R5II? Well, you may need the resolution in a high performance camera or you shoot a lot of video.
Resolution/Performance: Yeah, it's a big difference. As mentioned above in my challenges with file sizes, it comes at a cost. But that cost is obviously worth it for many people - especially wildlife photographers and videographers. There's no denying those benefits if you need them. The great news here is that the R5II's capabilities to replace an R3 are valid. This camera is every bit as capable as the R3 in shooting performance and I would even argue that it's better suited for it because of the new AF and pre-capture feature. As those files add up, be prepared to allocate enough storage for it!
For my commercial and magazine photography, I rarely used the R3, except as a handheld backup or for behind-the-scenes shots. While 24MP is still very capable today, 45MP excels in situations where that extra detail is essential. That’s the main reason I keep it. The higher resolution allows me to zoom in for pixel-level edits, making it easier to clean up files. It also gives me the flexibility to shoot wide and crop later to meet the art director’s needs. I also plan to use the R5II for recreational wildlife photography. The R3 and R6II have been excellent for this, but the added resolution of the R5II, combined with a stacked sensor, will be a great improvement.
Video: 8K video may sound like a gimmick to a lot of people and to an extent, it may be. But if you're a wildlife videographer, you now have 8K60 and 8K24 that can reliably be shot in camera to memory cards while using some of the absolute best animal tracking ever seen. What's more, you can crop in on 8K video 2x and get 4K resolution - giving you more effective focal length. You can then crop into that another 2x and have 1080p! I would have to imagine that this is a very enticing package for wildlife videography. This camera introduces much greater flexibility for video resolution than the R3, supports four audio channels (you can record scratch audio from camera in addition to dual channels from external microphones), proper file naming of the Cinema line (honestly HUGE for big jobs), CLOG2, and full-size HDMI. I don't think I need to say more. This is just a VERY robust video package. I still need more time to test low-light video because I will say the image does seem to fall apart beyond 12,800ISO while the R3 performed much better than it should have at high ISO video.
For Me: I am replacing my original R5 and my C70 with a pair of R5II bodies. This is not replacing my R3 bodies. In fact, I've had an R1 on pre-order and I may see how that camera does and pick up another R1. I'm still not convinced that the R1 will be that much better than an R3, enough to dump $12,600+ into a pair of bodies and only get maybe $4,000-5,000 back for selling the truly sublime R3. It's a very hard sell, Canon....a VERY hard sell. For video, I quickly fell out of love with the original R5 because I hated the colors coming off of that sensor in video. The R3 has been my primary handheld video camera for almost every job I've shot in the past 3 years. The C70 will be sold as well. That camera is pretty great, but the image is barely 4K, and appears softer than I like...it doesn't leave any option to crop reframe on a 4K timeline like the crispy downsampled 4K from the R3. The only reason I even got the C70 was to have a dedicated full-time video camera sitting in a bag ready to go at all time, and because we were working with people on set that wanted to see us shooting with "big professional gear" to make their investment seem more worthwhile. I don't like that this is how our industry is run, but I also can't ignore it. We'll rent a C80 if we need to put on a show for them again. haha
Biggest Negatives So Far: Aside from everything I've already mentioned, I've encountered a few less desirable quarks with the R5II over the past month. Last week, I took a burst of about 8-10 shots and the AF box totally disappeared. I quickly followed that up with a second burst and the autofocus was totally non functional. I was shooting with electronic shutter at 30fps in cRAW when this happened. On Wednesday last week it was unseasonably hot in Indianapolis. Sitting on the ground was my R3 baking in the sun, in my hands was the R5II. Soon enough, the camera became very hot to the touch on both side of the body. The camera was showing 4 bars on the heat display after about 30 minutes. It reached 5 bars at 1-hour and quickly rose to 6 bars within a few minutes. I turned the camera off and let it cool off for a bit while I used the R3 - which didn't even flinch at the temperatures. I picked up the R5 again after about half an hour and the camera SKYROCKETED to 8 bars after just another 20 minutes of shooting photos and having a half hour to sit. I also encountered a lens error ONCE when I powered on and had the RF 100-300 attached without any teleconverters.
Blackout free display has to be one of the most annoying settings Canon has ever introduced. When I’m using electronic shutter, I love to use blackout free display - it’s a great feature to have. But if I want to switch back to EFC Shutter, I need to go into the menu and manually disable blackout free display before I can switch my shutter mode. Why? What is the point of this? Why can’t my request to change to a different shutter mode automatically change this? Also, FALSE COLOR! This is an exposure tool. I want to quickly toggle this on to check exposure and then turn it off so it doesn't look completely stupid while I'm recording. How it’s being implemented right now is virtually useless unless you’re just turning it on to set exposure before recording in a controlled environment and then you turn back on all the stuff you want to use.
The editing process and noise performance with the R5II files have been quite unique, particularly in how they’re handled in Lightroom compared to previous Canon models. You can push the shadows so far that they turn white, requiring extra caution when working with the RAW files. It feels like there might be a future update to address this, but there’s no guarantee. That said, the early files definitely looked worse. However, after a recent Lightroom update last week, I noticed a significant improvement in how the R5II images are rendered upon import. It could be subjective, but with my extensive experience working with these files, the recent update seems to have made a noticeable difference in overall image quality.
Biggest Pros So Far: The autofocus has been a pleasant surprise—it’s significantly better. My main cameras are two Canon R3 bodies, along with the R6 Mark II and the original R5. As a motorsports photographer, I can confidently say the autofocus has seen a substantial improvement. Subject acquisition and tracking are incredibly smooth and seamless; I instantly noticed the difference. The AF also performs much better in low light, even isolating a driver’s eye wearing a helmet through windshields or open doors, which is a huge quality-of-life upgrade I’m excited to see in the R1.
The CLOG2 video files are also impressive. The highlight roll-off, colors, and dynamic range are noticeably better, resulting in a much more polished video file. Plus, with CLOG2, the R5II now integrates into a full cinema workflow, complete with a proper file-naming structure to match!
Conclusion: With the autofocus and video improvements in the R5II, my anticipation for the upcoming R1 has only grown. The R3 is exceptional in its own right and nothing has taken that away. The main reason I would recommend the R5II over the R3 for still photography is if you genuinely need the higher resolution or the pre-capture feature. For video work, however, the R5II offers greater versatility with its higher video resolution options, additional audio channels, Cinema line file naming, CLOG2, and full-size HDMI, making it a more robust choice for videographers.
