Canon EOS 5DS and 5DSR

[Springf]

thanks Canon's lens ecosystem cannot be overlooked it has variety and it has certain very specialized lenses that no other manufacturers have (e.g. Canon MP-E 65mm 1-5x Macro Lens) but they are also starting to make shitty lenses these days such as the 24~70 f4 L IS

24-70 f/4 IS is a very good general purpose lens. Smaller, lighter and sharper than 24-105 IS. The macro function also very useful sometimes for small works. And last years dropping in price makes its performance to price ratio very good also.

 

[SkyStrike]

haha i thought the 24-70F4L IS was a pretty decent lens compared to the 24-105 which many loved to hate just because it was a kit lens.

the latest lenses so far have been pretty good.

i just hope the 5D4 will have much better DR and ISO performance vs the current 5D3.

Was looking at the samples posted by canon japan for the 5DSR.... apart from the hippo shot from the 5DSR and the portrait shot from the 5DS, the rest of the samples are frankly quite disappointing.

the "fantasy" image shows even the 24-70 F2.8 II at F11 can't resolve the 50MP sensor properly...

5Ds:

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5ds/

5DSR:

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dsr/

I'm not sure if it's my eyes playing tricks on me... the 5DS samples looks abit better than the 5DSR when using the 24-70 mk II. Not sure if it's different processing or what.. But at the moment, the samples for the 5DSR is as you have mentioned, disappointing.

And in Canon lens lineup, I really doubt there are alot of lens that can utilize the 50mpx.


In 5D4, I hope it comes up with a sensor that can finally compete with Sony ones (either beat them or join them).

 

[raydio]

In 5D4, I hope it comes up with a sensor that can finally compete with Sony ones (either beat them or join them).

How many years have we all been 'hoping'?... I too lend my hope in DR improvements and it now rests with the 5D4.

Here's my take in Canon's strategy over the past 4 or 5 years:

With over-all camera technology, Canon had been behind in 3 strategic areas

i) AF technology
ii) MP resolution
iii) Wide DR

Here, in my humble opinion, is how Canon has 'corrected' its deficiencies in these three key areas:

a) With the introduction of the 5D3, Canon had at least met and may have slightly exceeded leading edge AF technology. Prior to the 5D3, there were many complaints and defections because of Canon's inferior AF-technology. These complaints have been completely silenced.

b) With the recent announcement of the 5DS/5DSr, Canon exceeded the MP resolution for DSLR's. Although the cameras are still to be introduced and much testing will occur, I believe that based on Canon's history, these cameras will likely function at a similar level as its competitors or may even exceed them when high resolution IQ is taken into consideration. Of course DR is still not a factor in its favour.

c) The next strategic area that Canon still has to address, is widening its DR capabilities. In order to remain competitive and to answer the many complaints of its customers, I really believe that there is 'sufficient competency' in Canon's management to meet or exceed the current level of leading DR technology. Based on the prior two points above, I sincerely believe that Canon is working to address this as we read this. I may be overly optimistic but I think that Canon's answer to the DR dilemma will be answered with he next iteration of the 5D.

 

[renzokuken]

haha i thought the 24-70F4L IS was a pretty decent lens compared to the 24-105 which many loved to hate just because it was a kit lens.

the latest lenses so far have been pretty good.

i just hope the 5D4 will have much better DR and ISO performance vs the current 5D3.

Was looking at the samples posted by canon japan for the 5DSR.... apart from the hippo shot from the 5DSR and the portrait shot from the 5DS, the rest of the samples are frankly quite disappointing.

the "fantasy" image shows even the 24-70 F2.8 II at F11 can't resolve the 50MP sensor properly...

5Ds:

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5ds/

5DSR:

http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos5dsr/

Oh let me explain. When I said the 24-70 f4 suck, i meant it from a purist point of view
it is definitely "decent"
but I always feel that they could have made it sharper

24-70 f/4 IS is a very good general purpose lens. Smaller, lighter and sharper than 24-105 IS. The macro function also very useful sometimes for small works. And last years dropping in price makes its performance to price ratio very good also.

I don't think people use 24~105 for still studio photography for "fine art"
but I'm not doing photography for a living so ... correct me if I am wrong

regardless

I think if you put the 24~70f2.8 II or the f4 onto a 50MP camera
it's not gonna look good.

they are not "fine art" or "fine detail" lenses, they are zoom lenses
all their flaws will look more apparent.

they are great lenses in their own right and are catered to different kind of needs

but I meant it from a 50MP, Studio, absolute sharpness standpoint


Cheers

 

[renzokuken]

How many years have we all been 'hoping'?... I too lend my hope in DR improvements and it now rests with the 5D4.

Here's my take in Canon's strategy over the past 4 or 5 years:

With over-all camera technology, Canon had been behind in 3 strategic areas

i) AF technology
ii) MP resolution
iii) Wide DR

Here, in my humble opinion, is how Canon has 'corrected' its deficiencies in these three key areas:

a) With the introduction of the 5D3, Canon had at least met and may have slightly exceeded leading edge AF technology. Prior to the 5D3, there were many complaints and defections because of Canon's inferior AF-technology. These complaints have been completely silenced.

b) With the recent announcement of the 5DS/5DSr, Canon exceeded the MP resolution for DSLR's. Although the cameras are still to be introduced and much testing will occur, I believe that based on Canon's history, these cameras will likely function at a similar level as its competitors or may even exceed them when high resolution IQ is taken into consideration. Of course DR is still not a factor in its favour.

c) The next strategic area that Canon still has to address, is widening its DR capabilities. In order to remain competitive and to answer the many complaints of its customers, I really believe that there is 'sufficient competency' in Canon's management to meet or exceed the current level of leading DR technology. Based on the prior two points above, I sincerely believe that Canon is working to address this as we read this. I may be overly optimistic but I think that Canon's answer to the DR dilemma will be answered with he next iteration of the 5D.

I know nothing about sensors and the technicalities behind it

but I have seen many people complaining about the lack of a on chip SNR something something
it's all over the web

people online claims that Sony and Nikon moved a certain component to the chip itself instead of letting it be processed by the camera processor, and this made their sensors better

what are your sentiments with regards to that?
Do you think it's something that needs to be improved too?

 

[raydio]

I know nothing about sensors and the technicalities behind it

but I have seen many people complaining about the lack of a on chip SNR something something
it's all over the web

people online claims that Sony and Nikon moved a certain component to the chip itself instead of letting it be processed by the camera processor, and this made their sensors better

what are your sentiments with regards to that?
Do you think it's something that needs to be improved too?

I haven't heard of this particular issue, but any improvement would be welcome as long as it leads to better over-all IQ and usability.

 

[Kit]

I haven't had a Canon since the 5D2. DR really that bad?

 

[rhino123]

I haven't had a Canon since the 5D2. DR really that bad?

I find that DR is lagging in lower ISO, it became better in higher ISO.

Somehow, I find Canon's high ISO noise performance control is pretty good, even when comparing to other cameras such as Sony. Also AF system is top notch, ever since her introduction of 5DmkIII, 70D and recently 7DmkII as well as the 1DX, all of these are right up there... better than many other cameras. I basically didn't have much to complain about Canon.

 

[eggie87]

I find that DR is lagging in lower ISO, it became better in higher ISO.

Somehow, I find Canon's high ISO noise performance control is pretty good, even when comparing to other cameras such as Sony. Also AF system is top notch, ever since her introduction of 5DmkIII, 70D and recently 7DmkII as well as the 1DX, all of these are right up there... better than many other cameras. I basically didn't have much to complain about Canon.

I read a report saying its 2 stops higher in dr than the 5d3 at higher iso..dunno which iso...waiting to see some full res landscape shots when it's out..

 

[brapodam]

I haven't had a Canon since the 5D2. DR really that bad?

DR is bad if you only need low ISOs. At low ISO Canon FF has DR of a m4/3 of equivalent age

 

[rhino123]

I read a report saying its 2 stops higher in dr than the 5d3 at higher iso..dunno which iso...waiting to see some full res landscape shots when it's out..

Yeah. Er I believe it is 1.5 to 2 stop better than 1DX. But high ISO noise performance fall abit lower as compared to 7DMKII.

It is noted that the camera would perform around the same Dynamic range as 5DmkIII (which is a bummer, if it was targeted at landscape photographers, who I believe, other than having great resolution, they wanted to have greater dynamic range too and at low ISO.)

Reference: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_5ds.html#Anchor-Latest-3800

 

[renzokuken]

I find that DR is lagging in lower ISO, it became better in higher ISO.

Somehow, I find Canon's high ISO noise performance control is pretty good, even when comparing to other cameras such as Sony. Also AF system is top notch, ever since her introduction of 5DmkIII, 70D and recently 7DmkII as well as the 1DX, all of these are right up there... better than many other cameras. I basically didn't have much to complain about Canon.

Though many people think this website is not credible

Dxomark's data actually agrees with you on this.

Canon's low ISO is really really lacking behind, but beyond something like 3200 ISO or so, all the brand's sensor technical capabilities starts to converge.


5DS and 5DS R

I hope the lower ISO range of 100-6400 means that they did something to the low ISO performance of the sensor. It would make more sense then.

 

[rhino123]

5DS and 5DS R

I hope the lower ISO range of 100-6400 means that they did something to the low ISO performance of the sensor. It would make more sense then.

I doubt so. From what I understand (very limited), having packed so much megapixel into the sensor, it really affect the noise performance of the sensor. Therefore, noise performance gonna be hit pretty badly.

What I am more disappointed in is the dynamic range. there are reviews and reports online that when Nikon introduced their D800, the Dynamic Range is around 2 stops better than Canon's 5DmkIII. Now that Canon introduced her own version of high resolution camera (which incidently is much higher than D800/ D810 in term of MP count), but the dynamic range is only around the same as the mkIII.

Anyway, I have make it a point not to just look at numbers... and prefer to see real life application. So I will wait for the camera to launch and more people to buy, then read the comments and reviews more

 

[ricleo]

hehe a lens sucking and a lens that is definitely decent are on very different ends of the measuring scale.

Even the nikkor 14-24mm F2.8 which was known as the sharpest UWA zoom did not do that well on the 36MP D800 series of cameras.

if you are looking at things "from a 50MP, Studio, absolute sharpness standpoint", that is a niche that is really specialized, and bordering on too much pixel peeping if you ask me. Most lenses apart from the latest new releases will not "pass" the above requirements. 36MP on the A7R is already more than enough for me.

The content and composition in the image is more important. For me, 50MP is definitely overkill and i do not fall into canon's "target market" for these cameras. I would be keeping my 5D3 and see what the 5D4 offers.

Oh let me explain. When I said the 24-70 f4 suck, i meant it from a purist point of view
it is definitely "decent"
but I always feel that they could have made it sharper

I don't think people use 24~105 for still studio photography for "fine art"
but I'm not doing photography for a living so ... correct me if I am wrong

regardless

I think if you put the 24~70f2.8 II or the f4 onto a 50MP camera
it's not gonna look good.

they are not "fine art" or "fine detail" lenses, they are zoom lenses
all their flaws will look more apparent.

they are great lenses in their own right and are catered to different kind of needs

but I meant it from a 50MP, Studio, absolute sharpness standpoint

Cheers

 

[renzokuken]

hehe a lens sucking and a lens that is definitely decent are on very different ends of the measuring scale.

Even the nikkor 14-24mm F2.8 which was known as the sharpest UWA zoom did not do that well on the 36MP D800 series of cameras.

if you are looking at things "from a 50MP, Studio, absolute sharpness standpoint", that is a niche that is really specialized, and bordering on too much pixel peeping if you ask me. Most lenses apart from the latest new releases will not "pass" the above requirements. 36MP on the A7R is already more than enough for me.

The content and composition in the image is more important. For me, 50MP is definitely overkill and i do not fall into canon's "target market" for these cameras. I would be keeping my 5D3 and see what the 5D4 offers.

hahahaha. studio/very fine detail requires pixel peeping, because the 100% image crop quality is relevant to their work.
in short. #1 Canon don't know what they are doing (it's a niche and they didn't even get their needs right)

and

#2 having so many megapixels when their lens line and DR can't catch up is pointless

I think both of us definitely agree on the above 2

PS: I was very impressed with the D800 when it came out. the amount of detail you can recover from the shadows is amazing.It was the first time anyone added so much Megapixel into a DSLR and yet the DR improved significantly

I doubt so. From what I understand (very limited), having packed so much megapixel into the sensor, it really affect the noise performance of the sensor. Therefore, noise performance gonna be hit pretty badly.

What I am more disappointed in is the dynamic range. there are reviews and reports online that when Nikon introduced their D800, the Dynamic Range is around 2 stops better than Canon's 5DmkIII. Now that Canon introduced her own version of high resolution camera (which incidently is much higher than D800/ D810 in term of MP count), but the dynamic range is only around the same as the mkIII.

Anyway, I have make it a point not to just look at numbers... and prefer to see real life application. So I will wait for the camera to launch and more people to buy, then read the comments and reviews more

I think the numbers are indicative
not real hard facts, but indicative

many Canon users (people who know their stuff) have been hoping for Canon to surprise or impress them
they waited and waited and waited

then the 5DIII came out, better AF, lousier Dynamic range - Acceptable but not impressive
then 5 years Passed
7D2........ well you can almost feel their disappointment when you go to some other forums. hugely underwhelming

i don't expect Canon to pull off some magic tricks with this one. but you are right,
let's wait and watch and maybe, just maybe they will unexpectedly surprise us (highly unlikely)

Cheers

 

[ricleo]

PS: I was very impressed with the D800 when it came out. the amount of detail you can recover from the shadows is amazing.It was the first time anyone added so much Megapixel into a DSLR and yet the DR improved significantly

hehe this i definitely agree. the 36MP sony sensors used in the d800 and a7r are really excellent on DR and resolution.

I am not a studio shooter, so I don't understand why there would be a need to pixel-peep at a resolution of 50MP. Does a studio photographer really need to see every pore and hair and imperfection on a model's face? More work to smoothen the skin and fix imperfections in make up/hair on the model.

I only know that these sort of pixel density (usually found in Medium format) are useful for printing of very large size posters/billboards that require close up viewing.

 

[renzokuken]

hehe this i definitely agree. the 36MP sony sensors used in the d800 and a7r are really excellent on DR and resolution.

I am not a studio shooter, so I don't understand why there would be a need to pixel-peep at a resolution of 50MP. Does a studio photographer really need to see every pore and hair and imperfection on a model's face? More work to smoothen the skin and fix imperfections in make up/hair on the model.

I only know that these sort of pixel density (usually found in Medium format) are useful for printing of very large size posters/billboards that require close up viewing.

well

I've read an article before whereby this photographer was taking photos of old artifacts like porcelain, or fabric with very fine detail.
for that kinda work, capturing 100% RBG information (avoiding interpolation) is extremely extremely helpful, hence these people usually use Medium Formats where there are enough Megapixels, the good quality once. they do it to document and to archive.

so again what is the 5DS and 5DS R aimed at? not enough DR for landscape, not detailed enough for fine detail studio photography.

you are right in the sense that for human subjects pixel peeping becomes entirely irrelevant.
heck printing at A0 still makes pixel peeping irrelevant too
hahaha was just reading how people using the Zeiss Otus was complaining that the lens was too sharp!!! LOL

i feel pixel peeping is useful if you want to make an objective comparison between cameras
comparing absolute technical performance
other than that there's no real benefit to pixel peep, unless the difference in capability gets overly large

 

[raydio]

For those who are planning to buy one or both of these cameras, Canon has officially stated that they will begin selling the 5Ds and 5Dsr on June 29th.

 

[Shizuma]

I prefer the 'little things' which will really get me excited and seriously make me want to upgrade:

- Ability to set Bulb mode on camera to a few minutes in increments of 5/10 seconds.
- Interval shooting in-camera.
- Better dynamic range.
- On demand grid lines in viewfinder.
- IS in camera body which can also sync with lenses with IS to give more added stabilization.

If the above are possible, I don't mind they compromise the camera to 15MP with 9 focusing points, only centre point cross-type focusing, 4fps. I'll be happy to take it!

get a canon 500 D with Magic Lantern. no better dynamic range or grid or IS inbody but first two... yes

 

[renzokuken]

100% Studio Comparison with various other cameras

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-5ds-r/canon-5ds-rA.HTM#HIGHRES

what's your verdict guys?

would like you to focus attention towards all the D810 comparison (especially at ISO 6400)