Canon EOS R5 Mark II Owners Unite: Discuss and Post Photos!

Went out this morning to try some flying birds. The harsh mid-morning light caused a lot issues with exposure and shadows, so no wallhangers. But I was mainly interested in seeing how the AF performed, and I was definitely pleased. The Mark2 seems to acquire focus more quickly than the R5, and the blackout free viewfinder makes it easier to follow the bird.
MALL-8219240829.jpgROPI-240829.jpg
 
I was thinking of putting a screen protector on the R5 Mark II. Checking the specs, it seems that the R5 Mark II has the same screen size as the R6 Mark II, while the R5 screen is bigger. Am I missing something? From the Canon website:


R5 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R6 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R5

3.2-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
3.15 in./8.01cm diagonal (2.63 in./6.67cm width, 1.75 in./4.44cm height)
 
Yno said:
I was thinking of putting a screen protector on the R5 Mark II. Checking the specs, it seems that the R5 Mark II has the same screen size as the R6 Mark II, while the R5 screen is bigger. Am I missing something? From the Canon website:


R5 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R6 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R5

3.2-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
3.15 in./8.01cm diagonal (2.63 in./6.67cm width, 1.75 in./4.44cm height)
Click to expand...
Ah, at last, a reason for not splashing out on a Mark 2. I would absolutely hate a smaller screen than on my R5. Thank you, Yno. :ROFLMAO:
 
Yno said:
I was thinking of putting a screen protector on the R5 Mark II. Checking the specs, it seems that the R5 Mark II has the same screen size as the R6 Mark II, while the R5 screen is bigger. Am I missing something? From the Canon website:


R5 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R6 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R5

3.2-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
3.15 in./8.01cm diagonal (2.63 in./6.67cm width, 1.75 in./4.44cm height)
Click to expand...
Before delivery of my R5 MKII, everything I read said the screens are the same. Comparing them just now, I can not detect a difference in size. I wonder if Canon updated their method of measurement since release of R5?
 
Terrycanon said:
Ah, at last, a reason for not splashing out on a Mark 2. I would absolutely hate a smaller screen than on my R5. Thank you, Yno. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
I have both, and they look the same to me Terry just now. You will have to find a different reason not to change.
 
I don't know why I just didn't pull out the calipers in the first place. Since I own the R6 mark II and the R5 Mark II, I carefully measured the width of them both.

R6 Mark II - 2.44 inches wide
R5 Mark II - 2.63 inches wide

So sorry, @Terrycanon! Open that wallet!

I might just try to send this information to Canon USA. And I suppose I should check a few other Canon sites.
 
I should mention this to Rudy Winston. Oh wait....
 
Does it run on USB power? When I am afloat, I have two 50 AH 12V LiFePO4 batteries...

1725037159955.png

... and my electric motor has a USB socket on it...

Trossachs06Mar24_2832.jpg


The alternative would be some kind of step down device to plug it into the LiFePO4 directly.

That would last a day with the shutter button half-pressed!
 
Cap'n Fishy said:
That 'going back in time' feature would be a superb ability for me when I go after the leaping salmon. The number of times I am just slightly too late makes up over 90% of what I bring home. There is no warning. You sit with the camera prefocused on the space midway across the falls and watch the water in the pool below. But when a fish jumps it is through your frame in less than half a second. It's blink-and-you-miss-it stuff...

View attachment 98935

The question would be, how many batteries would you need, to sit for 4 hours with your finger half-pressed on the shutter?
Click to expand...
If you are sitting on a half press a lot with pre-capture, you may also need the cooling grip. Yesterday AM I was out and spotted two hawks hunting in a marsh. The pre-capture got very heavy use and although the camera didn't overheat the warning indicator was only two bars from maximum when the action died down. I'm not exactly sure of the time. Maybe 40 minutes or so. The camera did cool down quickly, however.
 
Yno said:
I was thinking of putting a screen protector on the R5 Mark II. Checking the specs, it seems that the R5 Mark II has the same screen size as the R6 Mark II, while the R5 screen is bigger. Am I missing something? From the Canon website:


R5 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R6 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R5

3.2-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
3.15 in./8.01cm diagonal (2.63 in./6.67cm width, 1.75 in./4.44cm height)
Click to expand...
I posted about this on the Canon Community forum. I received a reply from a Canon employee and product expert thanking me for the information. She alerted the website team about the error. Maybe it will get fixed after the Labor Day holiday.
 
PS: My screen protector is installed. I don't think this is quite as controversial as using UV filters...
 
This was a great interview. Most of the discussion was about the R5ii and Jeff Cable's favorite lens at the Olympics was the RF 100-300 F2.8.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.
 
Yno said:
I was thinking of putting a screen protector on the R5 Mark II. Checking the specs, it seems that the R5 Mark II has the same screen size as the R6 Mark II, while the R5 screen is bigger. Am I missing something? From the Canon website:


R5 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R6 Mark II

3.0-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
2.95 in./7.5cm diagonal (2.44 in./6.2cm width, 1.65 in./4.2cm height)


R5

3.2-inch (screen aspect ratio of 3:2)
3.15 in./8.01cm diagonal (2.63 in./6.67cm width, 1.75 in./4.44cm height)
Click to expand...
I bought the Vello Ultra II screen, listed for the 5. It fits fine (if you can mange to apply it correctly, which challenges me :rolleyes: )
 
gossamer88 said:
Has anyone tested the Canon LP-E6NH or 3rd party versions? I heard 3rd party ones do not even power the R5ii :oops:
Click to expand...
I would advise against the E6NH- I inserted one ( with some difficulty, a very tight fit) and had a lot of trouble removing it. Aside from any power issues, they’re just too big!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Levina de Ruijter
The R1 and R5m2 have arrived!
2 3
Replies
53
Views
1K
Tronhard
Tronhard
West Coast Birder
Canon’s big announcements coming the third week of July
Replies
13
Views
357
West Coast Birder
West Coast Birder
West Coast Birder
R5 Mark II is getting more real now!
Replies
15
Views
602
Levina de Ruijter
Levina de Ruijter
West Coast Birder
Official announcement of the Canon EOS R1 is now expected in July
Replies
1
Views
144
West Coast Birder
West Coast Birder
Levina de Ruijter
Canon: shipping R5 mark II may be delayed more than 6 months
Replies
1
Views
118
Tronhard
Tronhard
Back
Top Bottom