R3 or R5 Mark II?

[SportsEditor]

I'm a sports editor of a weekly newspaper and I use a 7D with 2.8 70-200 and 2.8 24-70 lenses.
Looking to upgrade. Won’t be getting bigger lenses since I take notes during games.

I'm torn between the R5 Mark II and R3. I need the low-light performance of the R3 (high school field and court lighting) and the cropping of the 45MP R5 Mark II.

Thanks for any help.

 

[AlanF]

I'm a sports editor of a weekly newspaper and I use a 7D with 2.8 70-200 and 2.8 24-70 lenses.
Looking to upgrade. Won’t be getting bigger lenses since I take notes during games.

I'm torn between the R5 Mark II and R3. I need the low-light performance of the R3 (high school field and court lighting) and the cropping of the 45MP R5 Mark II.

Thanks for any help.

Whatever is the more important for you - it's your precise needs that count. If you downsize the R5 ii's images to the R3, then it competes better with it for noise. Both will completely murder the 7D for noise, and the R5ii has the same reach s the 7D.

 

[Quack]

If you run a newspaper, then you should know if there will ever be any image that you can't crop on an R3 and print in a newspaper. My guess is no.

 

[mmmm]

and the R5ii has the same reach s the 7D.

Sorry, I may have misunderstood what you're saying... But the 7d is a crop 1.6 v R5ii is full frame, that doesn't equal the same reach. That said, English is not my first language. I am likely to be misinterpreting what you mean.

 

[AlanF]

Sorry, I may have misunderstood what you're saying... But the 7d is a crop 1.6 v R5ii is full frame, that doesn't equal the same reach. That said, English is not my first language. I am likely to be misinterpreting what you mean.

It means it has the same size pixels as the 7D which means it has the same resolution = the same reach. Crop the R5 or R5ii by 1.6 and you have the ~18 Mpx of the 7D.

 

[mmmm]

It means it has the same size pixels as the 7D which means it has the same resolution = the same reach. Crop the R5 or R5ii by 1.6 and you have the ~18 Mpx of the 7D.

Ok thanks for the clarification!

 

[SportsEditor]

If you run a newspaper, then you should know if there will ever be any image that you can't crop on an R3 and print in a newspaper. My guess is no.

I don’t run a newspaper. I’m a sports editor and do other reporting. I don’t know. That’s why I’m asking. Do you have examples of cropped R3 photos in newsprint?

 

[Crapking]

I am a sports photojournalist and began my career with the 7D, and have both the R3 and R5m2, as well as the R1. Many forums and YOUTUBE comparisons are out there for your scenario, but here is my $0.02, There is a little more versatility and better AF with the R5m2, especially if you want any video, and the COMMUNICATIONS menus/versatility is better (i.e you can map a single button to transfer files to an FTP server while you shoot) whereas the R3 you have to open several menus, so for my workflow -needing to upload shots in real-time, I prefer the R5m2's ease of operation. But the image quality at on-line/paper resolutions (2400 x1800 typically) is nearly identical after cropping/processing so MY recommendation would have to depend on cost, ergonomics (weight +/- battery grip, +/- which 2nd camera you use - i.e battery redundancy, etc). B/c I mainly use the R1, I tend to use the R3 as my backup, but there situations where I prefer the R5m2's additional pixels for cropping, but honestly, the end product of both cameras will be outstanding - it will come down to budget and personal preference really.

 

[john1970]

If I were the sports editor for a newspaper and had to choose between the R3 and R5mk2 I would go with the R5Mk2 for the AF improvements and as others have stated you can downsize the image for less noise in low-light scenarios. With that said, I also do prefer the integrated vertical grip of the R3 and R1. Hence I own both the R5 Mk2 and R1 cameras.