Similar thought, I would say the R5 completely invalidates the Sony A9 line: similar AF, burst, buffer, and price, but almost double the resolution and better video (the R6 almost does the same to Canon's own 1DX3 unless you need the build quality). It also put effective pressure on other Sony lines that now offer only targeted benefits, while sacrificing areas that the R5 excels at. For example, the A7R4, do you need 60MP versus 45MP (sacrificing superior video and burst)? For the A7S3, do you need longer 4K recording times than what the R5 already offers (sacrificing 45MP versus 12MP)? And for the FX3, do you need the active cooling (even worse 10MP)? It has become narrowly targeted because the R5 does so many things well without sacrificing what you would lose if you went with an A7R4, or A7S3, or FX3. Of course, you could go with the A1, basically a faster R5, but at a whopping 50% more cost, making the R5 look like a bargain.