Canon 80D To R5

I have an underwater setup that I'm pretty happy with. I use Canon 80D with Canon 100mm, Sigma 17-70mm and Tokina Fisheye. I recently purchased and R5 for landscape and wildlife. Will be great for Botswana safari next year.

I'm trying to justify the expense of getting a new housing and a new set of lenses and would be interested in thoughts on benefits to moving from my 80D to R5 for underwater. 

Thanks!

On your lenses, the Canon 100mm would be replaced with an RF 100mm lens.  There is no direct replacement for the 10-17mm lens, the 8-15 is either an 8mm circular fisheye or a 15mm full frame fisheye, in between it doesn't completely fill the frame.  The RF 100mm macro has a known issue with close focusing in that the focus changes when you stop down the aperture to take the image, which could be an issue if you make use of the 1.4x magnification it offers.   I'm not sure what you would replace the 17-70 with.  

As far as full frame advantages, the newer camera would of course be nice but the improvements on land won't be as dramatic UW.  

On 3/2/2023 at 10:11 AM, ChrisRoss said:

On your lenses, the Canon 100mm would be replaced with an RF 100mm lens.  There is no direct replacement for the 10-17mm lens, the 8-15 is either an 8mm circular fisheye or a 15mm full frame fisheye, in between it doesn't completely fill the frame.  The RF 100mm macro has a known issue with close focusing in that the focus changes when you stop down the aperture to take the image, which could be an issue if you make use of the 1.4x magnification it offers.   I'm not sure what you would replace the 17-70 with.  

As far as full frame advantages, the newer camera would of course be nice but the improvements on land won't be as dramatic UW.  

Thank you for the response. Sorry for the delay. I was off in New Zealand for a bit and wrote this there without giving it a whole lot of thought.

I am leaning towards just staying with the 80D underwater and using R5 for topside.

I have an upcoming trip to Solomons on the Bilikiki which is making me question whether I should "upgrade".  If I did upgrade, would probably continue to use the EF 100mm. Choices for wide angle would either be EF 8-15 or RF 14-35. To fill the gap of "not sure what I'm going to see" Sigma 17-70, would think about either EF 24-70 or RF 24-70 or RF 24-105. Not sure the extra $1000 justifies the expense of the RF over the EF 24-70.

The biggest benefits I see to moving to the R5 is the eye auto focus, IBIS and the significantly better video. Currently use a cold shoe mounted Gopro 9 for video.

I'm in a very similar boat as you. I've been shooting with an Olympus EM1mii for the last 6 years. I've come to desire additional features and resolution in my images.

To start all over on a new system is so costly I'm leaning towards buying the R5 with a general landscape lens and wait for some more feedback from underwater shooters on the R5 before I drop a small car cost on a new housing lenses domes and rings.

What has been your experience so far on the R5 on land?

48 minutes ago, dafusco said:

I'm in a very similar boat as you. I've been shooting with an Olympus EM1mii for the last 6 years. I've come to desire additional features and resolution in my images.

To start all over on a new system is so costly I'm leaning towards buying the R5 with a general landscape lens and wait for some more feedback from underwater shooters on the R5 before I drop a small car cost on a new housing lenses domes and rings.

What has been your experience so far on the R5 on land?

I took the camera on a recent trip to New Zealand. Most of my lenses are for crop sensor, so had to invest in some new glass. I wanted to shoot night sky and the milky way while there. So, invested in a Sigma 14mm 1.8 lens. Didn't leave much for other lenses... Bought the inexpensive 50mm 1.8 and a 24-240mm for general walking around. I already had the Canon 100-400mm and the Canon 1.4 extender. I have to say the Canon 24-240mm is not a great lens. The 50mm 1.8 and the 100-400mm are great lenses. Having said that, the Canon R5 is a great camera. The IBIS system, video system and the auto focus are pretty amazing. I can see the potential of the camera, but can't say I've fully appreciated what it can do. I've been mainly doing underwater photography and now getting more into topside landscape. Next year will be going to Botswana, so another "animal" to tackle. If/when I do move to the R5 underwater, I plan to buy the Canon 8-15 fisheye and the Canon EF 24-70 2.8 II lens to add to the Canon 100mm prime I already have. For topside, I want to add the EF 70-200mm 2.8 and for Botswana the Sigma 60-600mm. Lot of money for glass. While it would be nice to get some of the new RF lenses, I can't justify the cost over a used Canon EF lens. The Canon RF to EF adapter works great.

Still on the fence about buying the 2 lenses, new housing for the trip to Solomons.

On 3/29/2023 at 9:14 PM, Btscott said:

If/when I do move to the R5 underwater, I plan to buy the Canon 8-15 fisheye and the Canon EF 24-70 2.8 II lens to add to the Canon 100mm prime I already have

I made quite a similar move as yours, from 70D to R5 recently, with Nauticam housings and Z330 strobes.

Underwater, I also purchased the 8-15 fisheye for WA/CFWA and I also have the EF 100m for macro. Good options. But I am surprised with you 24-70 choice underwater. I have the EF 16-35 f2.8 which looks like a better choice for big stuff (sharks, mantas, etc) when a rectilinear lense is preferable. I used it already with my 70D and it is a really great lense behind the dome, even if not wide enough for an APSC cropped sensor. For me a 24-70 looks quite long underwater and kind of an in-between choice. Too long for small subjects (focus distance), and not short enough for big stuff (small angle).

For safaris, I kept both my 70-200 f4.8 and my Sigma 150-600 which worked well with my 70D in good lighting conditions, but which forced me to push the ISOs with the APSC as soon as the sun was lower, with some noise above ISO 800 (that was the main issue with the 70D). With the R5 these lenses do a great job. With the full frame sensor and the IBIS, you do not have to push the ISO so much, and in any case you have much less noise with high ISOs. Until 3200 the quality is impressive, and the IBIS allows you to shoot at 1/80 at 600mm without a pod. Really stunning.

Thanks for the reply. I hear you on the 24-70. Just thought it would be a good, "I don't know what I'm going to see on this dive" kind of lens.

Regarding your switch from 70D to R5, did you notice some huge difference in the quality of your photos when shooting underwater? I see for video, but stills?

I defintely see where it will be great above water, just still debating underwater.... Everytime is feel I've decided to upgrade, I then decide not to.

Have a Bilikiki trip coming up and need to decide. I'm leaning heavily on staying with the 80D and Gopro 9 for video. Thinking I'll invest in the above water glass and then circle back with a underwater upgrade after Botswana.

It's so hard to decide:-)

Regardless, appreciate your thought.

There are definitely a huge differences.

1. Autofocus: we are not in the same category here. With the R5 autofocus you enter into a new world. Tracking functionalities (eye tracking works very well with fishes) and responsiveness cannot be compared with the 80D. It makes a big difference in WA and fast moving subjects (fish portraits/shark/ray/schools). Obviously the benefits are less visible in macro, except in supermacro with the SMC1 lens for instance: the autofocus is extremely performant, it helps really a lot compared to the 70D.

2. IBIS : the system is of course a great advantage in video, but for stills as well. In macro/supermacro if you use the IS version of the 100mm, you will have a great combined stabilisation. With the SMC 1 it helps also a lot to stabilise focus dans frame tiny subjects.

3. 45mp : cropping capacities in post production are huge. You can really reframe your pictures quite significantly and still get the level of details and sharpness you had with the 80D…

Now is it really worse the price… about 5000$ for the new housing + new extension rings/ports ? Difficult to say. My feeling is that you would have a setup for the next 10 years, taking into account that your 80D combo can still be sold, there is a market for it (new entrant in UWP, beginners…). There will definitely be some evolutions for the R5 in the years to come, but I do not really see what kind of big disruption could pop out and push us to upgrade again. More mpx ? 45 is more than enough. Autofocus? The R5 AF system is a killer. Stabilisation ? Being able to reduce the shutter speed up to 8 stops is already impressive. Really, it would be difficult for me to imagine what could be improved in order to justify another change, both underwater and on land. Reason why I chose to invest in a long lasting combo.

Thanks Ben. Very helpful.

I decided to make the jump. I just purchased the Canon EF 16-35mm f2.8 III lens. Will pick up a 8-15mm fisheye and keep using the EF 100mm.

Thanks for the help.

 You will not be disappointed!

Just got my housing today. Will be a long 3 months til August and the Bilikiki.