Canon EOS R50 V Specifications

[David - Sydney]

Thank you all for the responses! That's exactly what I was curious about. If image quality is around the same but everything else is basically better, I'll probably trade in the 5D Mark iii. Like I said, I already have the R5 Mark ii but I was just wondering how well the "lower-end" mirrorless Canon cameras were in comparison with what used to be considered a high-end.

The change in the AA filter should also mean better resolution ie the R6 sensor of 24mp out-resolves the 30mp 5Div sensor as far as I know.
Given the replacement bodies at the moment, the R5 price is a bargain vs R5ii. Similarly for R6ii prior to the R6iii release but also for the first R6 version.
Second hand is another market that may be useful eg a used R5 to replace your 5Diii. The weight/size is less as well.

I may trade/sell the 5D and get a camera to go with the new R5 mark ii. Thanks for bringing up battery compatibility because I have a ton of batteries for the new R5, so maybe I'll see what other cameras are compatible with it.

There has been 2 new versions of of the LP-6 battery since the 5Diii/iv. Basically, your old batteries won't be very useful with mirrorless except for emergency usage. The 5Diii/iv could last all day but MILC bodies consume a lot more power and is probably the biggest disadvantage compared to DLSRs. That said, there is no way I would go back to a DLSR.

I think my EF to RF converters work on all mirrorless Canon cameras but I could be wrong. It may not work on crop sensor. Everything I have is for FF.

Yes they do. They can also add extra options for filters especially for ultra wide angle where front filtering is very expensive.
RF mount is the same for RF-S and full frame. If you adapt a EF-S lens on RF mount, the body will switch to APS-C sensor size on a full frame body.

 

[Blorp]

R6 sensor of 24mp out-resolves the 30mp 5Div

Interesting would this also apply to 35MP M6 II vs 24MP R50 V?

your old batteries won't be very useful with mirrorless except for emergency usage

I still routinely use 2 old LP-E6N (almost 10 years old) with my R5, I don't notice a difference in normal photo operation, might be different with video. I only got one E6NH that came with the camera.

 

[vikingar]

Interesting would this also apply to 35MP M6 II vs 24MP R50 V?


I still routinely use 2 old LP-E6N (almost 10 years old) with my R5, I don't notice a difference in normal photo operation, might be different with video. I only got one E6NH that came with the camera.

The H+ speed setting won't work fully with LP-E6N, i.e. it won't show green and it'll be slightly slower. The manual has a very confusing list of constraints for getting the full 12ps mechanical, so not sure how slower: https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/s/article/ART178130

 

[Blorp]

it won't show green

Yes you have to keep that in mind, but also a lot of other factors prevent it from becoming green (wifi connection for example, even if the new one is down over a certain percentage "green" will stop working). But If you don't really need that, no point in throwing the old batteries away. Two of those have gotten me through any shooting day even with 2000+ photos.

If you regularly reach the limit of the modern battery and use more than two for an event, it might make sense, if you don't it's fine.

 

[Etnaphele]

An interesting info that maybe is useful to some: minimum power supply for R50V should be 25W according to Canon:

 

[CharlesB]

The change in the AA filter should also mean better resolution ie the R6 sensor of 24mp out-resolves the 30mp 5Div sensor as far as I know.
Given the replacement bodies at the moment, the R5 price is a bargain vs R5ii. Similarly for R6ii prior to the R6iii release but also for the first R6 version.
Second hand is another market that may be useful eg a used R5 to replace your 5Diii. The weight/size is less as well.

There has been 2 new versions of of the LP-6 battery since the 5Diii/iv. Basically, your old batteries won't be very useful with mirrorless except for emergency usage. The 5Diii/iv could last all day but MILC bodies consume a lot more power and is probably the biggest disadvantage compared to DLSRs. That said, there is no way I would go back to a DLSR.


Yes they do. They can also add extra options for filters especially for ultra wide angle where front filtering is very expensive.
RF mount is the same for RF-S and full frame. If you adapt a EF-S lens on RF mount, the body will switch to APS-C sensor size on a full frame body.

Thank you for the great feedback!!!

I guess I have a lot to consider. I didn't even consider the r5 since I have the mark ii version, so that may be worth doing. I was thinking having crop sensor body might be worth pairing up with the mark ii. Then again, I know a lot of new cameras can be changed to cropped sensor. I wonder if there's any advantage to a crop sensor over FF.

Honestly, just knowing that any of the new mirrorless systems can compete and basically outperform the old dslrs is the main thing. Ever since mirrorless came out with its awesome features, I really wanted one. I was going to get an R5 but then it had a few issues (which I believe have been ironed out), so I waited for the mark ii and it's amazing. I'm basically looking for something my wife can use and/or something that my R5 Mark ii may be unable to do. Obviously not considering the R1. I did consider it when that came out with new R5Mii and would have gotten it if it was a higher resolution. I know high megapixels isn't everything but I like to crop macro photos, so it really comes in handy. I also don't do sports or anything super fast paced, so I didn't think the R1 was a good fit for me.

I have big battery grips on both of my cameras and my wife was actually complaining about the weight. I really never understood the whole weight thing a lot of people talked about until she was complaining about it. Not saying I'm super strong or anything but the weight never bugged me. So it was good to get another perspective on it. I won't put a grip on whatever new camera, which I think she'll be happy about. Plus it'll be a mirrorless instead of the big old 5D Mark iii. I think it'll make shooting more enjoyable to her!

Thanks again for all of the help, it's very much appreciated!

 

[koenkooi]

An interesting info that maybe is useful to some: minimum power supply for R50V should be 25W according to Canon:

View attachment 223178

It would be nice if they actually specified which voltage and amperage it wants, for example my R8 negotiates 5V when it charges, but will ask for 9V when turned on. So a hypothetical USB-C PD charger that is 5V and supplies the maximum allowed current, 5A, would be rated as a 25W charger, but it wouldn't work for powering the cam when it's on.

All USB-C PD power modes max out at 5A, so for higher wattages you can work backwards to see which voltage you need. PD 3.1 added 28V, 36V, and 48V, for 140W, 180W and 240W.

I have never seen a Canon cam use more than 7.5W when charging, so I suspect the "25W" is likely there to signal you need both 5V and 9V support.

 

[justaCanonuser]

Tbh, this is what I thought when Canon introduced Mirrorless camera with new RF mount, it expanded the constraints to create better (e.g. increase max aperture) lenses.

It gives the engineers definitely more space for more extreme lens designs. But Canon managed already in the 60s to create a 50mm f/0.95 monster lens (today, collectors are crazy about it) for their last M39 mount (classical Leica screw mount) rangefinders - just to show off against Nikon. This mount was with 39mm diameter quite narrow and the flange focal distance with 28.8mm substantially longer than the 20.0mm of the RF mount (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance). So, per se a smaller mount and a not so short flange focal distance still could allow at least for extremely fast 50mm lenses (not sure about 85mm lenses). But, of course, this was a fully manually focusing lens w/o any electrical contacts.

Btw, just for those interested in vintage rangefinders: in-focus images with that monster lens, shot wide open, happened only by accident or you had to fix the head of the person you wanted to portrait with screws and shoot from a sturdy tripod. That's why I added a nice compact Canon 50mm f/1.4 to my two Canon 7 bodies (I still love to load them sometimes with a film) and never would try a faster 50mm. There is also an f/1.2 version available that does not cost such a fortune. A 1.4/50 can still be focused wide open with such a rangefinder base (the "7" has an effective base length of 47mm), with relatively reliable in-focus results. Canon's fastest 85mm for M39 was f/1.8, I have a copy, a beautiful lens.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

I'm going with the Canon USA website and invoking the Cripple Hammer, since electronic stabilization is probably a strictly software function and, therefore, adds nothing to the cost of making an R50 V.

I still do not understand why people think software is free.
Canon does not use open source software downloaded from Sourceforge.
They pay people to write it, test it, maintain it, and support it.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

What Canon cameras, on the low-end surpass the Canon 5D Mark iii?

Pretty much all of them, but body wise any full-frame mirrorless camera besides the RP.

 

[Etnaphele]

It would be nice if they actually specified which voltage and amperage it wants, for example my R8 negotiates 5V when it charges, but will ask for 9V when turned on. So a hypothetical USB-C PD charger that is 5V and supplies the maximum allowed current, 5A, would be rated as a 25W charger, but it wouldn't work for powering the cam when it's on.

All USB-C PD power modes max out at 5A, so for higher wattages you can work backwards to see which voltage you need. PD 3.1 added 28V, 36V, and 48V, for 140W, 180W and 240W.

I have never seen a Canon cam use more than 7.5W when charging, so I suspect the "25W" is likely there to signal you need both 5V and 9V support.

View attachment 223179

It makes sense (but maybe you mean 45W for 9V, as 25W can be reached at 5V theoretically?), it’s unfortunate that they don’t give clear specs.
The R50V should also be able to draw power through the USB cable used for 4K webcam, let’s see if the manual will specify under which conditions.

 

[EOS 4 Life]

It makes sense (but maybe you mean 45W for 9V, as 25W can be reached at 5V theoretically?), it’s unfortunate that they don’t give clear specs.

Their "clear specs" are to buy their overpriced adapter.

 

[Etnaphele]

Their "clear specs" are to buy their overpriced adapter.

For wall outlet power it is indeed the only solution they ever contemplate, but the supplement I linked they list portable power banks. Canon doesn't make any. Instead of a list with some "tested but not guaranteed to work" 3rd party products, they could just give straight out what the camera needs in term of protocol, voltage and current and in which conditions. But OEMs (in every industry) love to NOT tell you

 

[Blorp]

any advantage to a crop sensor over FF

Resolution, the M6 II has more resolution than a cropped R5, and of course smaller optional lenses.

 

[John Wilde]

It's a small thing, but for the target audience "vertical tripod socket on grip side of camera" sounds like a nice feature.

 

[neuroanatomist]

It's a small thing, but for the target audience "vertical tripod socket on grip side of camera" sounds like a nice feature.

I just think, ugh. Vertical tripod socket, yes. But I loathe actually screwing anything into a tripod socket, which is why I use Arca-type quick release plates. My first annoyance about the PowerShot V1 that I preordered is that the tripod socket is about as close as physically possible to the battery door. It turns out that design is very reminiscent of the G5X II and G7X II, so I ordered dedicated Hejnar plate in the hopes that it works with the V1.

 

[David - Sydney]

It's a small thing, but for the target audience "vertical tripod socket on grip side of camera" sounds like a nice feature.

It will make it simpler for the increasing vertical video format but L brackets and video cages also work fine.

 

[David - Sydney]

For wall outlet power it is indeed the only solution they ever contemplate, but the supplement I linked they list portable power banks. Canon doesn't make any. Instead of a list with some "tested but not guaranteed to work" 3rd party products, they could just give straight out what the camera needs in term of protocol, voltage and current and in which conditions. But OEMs (in every industry) love to NOT tell you

Canon did the same for 3rd party CFe cards on the R5 that were tested for 8k usage and ones that didn't pass their tests. Canon didn't update the list after the first advanced user guide came out.

They could have provided the minimum sustained write speed but didn't for some unknown reason so it is guesswork or using 3rd party websites that have tested them to check if a particular card works or not.

 

[David - Sydney]

It gives the engineers definitely more space for more extreme lens designs. But Canon managed already in the 60s to create a 50mm f/0.95 monster lens (today, collectors are crazy about it) for their last M39 mount (classical Leica screw mount) rangefinders - just to show off against Nikon. This mount was with 39mm diameter quite narrow and the flange focal distance with 28.8mm substantially longer than the 20.0mm of the RF mount (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flange_focal_distance). So, per se a smaller mount and a not so short flange focal distance still could allow at least for extremely fast 50mm lenses (not sure about 85mm lenses).

Sony was criticised for the perceived limitation of E mount due to how narrow it is, but their wide angle lenses have surprised me.
They don't have a 10-20/4 lens though

 

[David - Sydney]

I guess I have a lot to consider. I didn't even consider the r5 since I have the mark ii version, so that may be worth doing. I was thinking having crop sensor body might be worth pairing up with the mark ii. Then again, I know a lot of new cameras can be changed to cropped sensor. I wonder if there's any advantage to a crop sensor over FF.

The R5 is almost identical to the R5ii for ergonomics besides the power/video switch and the size of the eye-controlled AF. It would be simple to switch between them or have a backup etc.
Within Canon's ecosystem, the R7 has the highest pixel density allowing for greater "reach" than the others eg R50v with 24mp. The R5 in crop mode is ~17mp.
On the other hand, the advantage of wide aperture bokeh from full frame is also there.

Honestly, just knowing that any of the new mirrorless systems can compete and basically outperform the old dslrs is the main thing. Ever since mirrorless came out with its awesome features, I really wanted one. I was going to get an R5 but then it had a few issues (which I believe have been ironed out), so I waited for the mark ii and it's amazing.

The other issue (storm in a teacup) for the R5 was the overheating drama. Only an issue for 3 video modes: 8k raw, 4k120 and 4kHQ modes.
Of course, it was the only hybrid camera capable of any 8k video at the time but 20 minutes wasn't good enough for the reviewers especially for the rebound times.
All video mode recording times were significantly improved via firmware within a year or so and the R5c basically eliminated them.

I pre-ordered my R5 and will use it until it dies or maybe when the R5iii comes out (3.5 years to go!). The R5ii advantages of eye controlled AF, priority subject AF, speed, flash under ES, rolling shutter etc are all great but don't impact my shooting genres very much. The slight DR loss is not critical but ideal not to lose it for me.
Upgrading also means buying a new back panel of my underwater housing but at least there is an upgrade path rather than buying a whole new housing.

I have big battery grips on both of my cameras and my wife was actually complaining about the weight. I really never understood the whole weight thing a lot of people talked about until she was complaining about it. Not saying I'm super strong or anything but the weight never bugged me.

The weight of the R5ii is 742gm, the R5 is 738gm vs 670gm for R6ii ie pretty close. The weight of the 5Diii is 860gm so all MILCs besides the R1 are lighter.