>>4289790The R5 is not meant to be a landscape photography, studio beast, poorfag medium format camera like /p/ users often lust for either. It makes a few design concessions to achieve its speed.
Given its cost (More on par with an A7RV or Z8 than a A7RIV or Z7II!) it has been extensively analyzed by our favorite nerd
>The second is that there is Noise Reduction (NR) in the raw files at low ISO up to ISO 640.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64211915>Yes, it [PDR] would be lower. My quick estimate is about 2/3 stop.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64212513>So, bear with me, this chart is a bit dense ...>Based on my experience with quite a few cameras I estimate the the NR gives ISO 100 and ISO 400 about 2/3 stop improvement in Photographic Dynamic Range (PDR).>NR always comes with loss of detail; whether that loss is visible is hard to say.https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64212692Is it visible? Yes, in the shadows. Canon achieves a FAKE dynamic range measurement before DCG kicks in at middling ISOs - its just forced shadow NR. Shadow detail is mushed!
This is a specialized camera that beats out other FFs in some areas by losing out in others. It is very expensive because very few people need one. It is not merely "the final upgrade for a canon user" - it is a TOOL for a subset of journalists.
Don't pay $3k+ for this camera unless sports/action photography is your passion and you're a resolution freak. It's not really THE best at everything else, and the price should be prohibitive - you're very close to being able to afford a GFX100 body at these price tiers, and could buy MULTIPLE other full frame cameras.
