Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              6      
7
       8              10       11       end
  

Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?
  
 
Pixel Perfect
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #1 · p.7 #1 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


The profits margins at the high end are enormous on the D5 and 1DXII cameras, more than 50%. My guess was that at the level of the cameras like the 5D4 we are talking more like 30% or so based on how the staff discounts scaled when I was at Canon. Even a lot of the L glass has huge margins, I got an almost 50% discount on the 24-70 f/2.8L II, same as the 1D4 and 1DX discounts I got. Alas they didn't sell the superteles very often and the discounts were terrible, you could still find better prices even non-grey.


Sep 09, 2017 at 12:50 AM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #2 · p.7 #2 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


nekrosoft13 wrote:
ok, so you don't want a mirrorless camera... you want DLSR with EVF

then just take your DSLR, set it to mirrorlock and use back LCD, and enjoy the inferior AF.


Lol, I'll take DPAF any day over whatever is in the a7RII.... when I used it for a few weddings last year, it was frustratingly poor for moving subjects. On the other hand, the a9 is very good.

I'd love to see a Canon hybrid OVF/EVF camera. Best of both worlds, IMO. Would be a good transition too.

current Canon lenses are not mirrorless ready, and since lens replacement would needed anyway, its better to get rid of the excess baggage and change mount anyway.

While they build up new lenses with correct mirrorless hybrid AF friendly motors, you can use old lenses with adapter.

When you combine phase and contrast all those stupid issues of micro-adjust go away.


Why are Canon lenses not mirrorless ready? Maybe some of the really old designs won't work great (slow AF), but the newer designs I've tried on the M5 with the EF adapter have focused quickly enough.

I don't think an all-out lens mount change is necessary. Rather, mirrorless-optimized lenses can be phased in. The mount itself is mostly an electronic interface. Changing it won't inherently change performance. It's whatever is happening in the camera and the lenses that will affect AF performance.

---------------------------------------------

nekrosoft13 wrote:
[
as long as flange distance is similar and they figure out Canon AF system its possible.

This is the difference between Canon and Sony

Canon doesn't want to help other lens manufactures to get their lenses working on Canon cameras, hence the frequent issues when new models come out.

Tamron, Sigma etc... have to reverse engineer the AF system.

Sony on the other hand has openned E-mount to other companies.
https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/Press/201102/11-018E/

This is the reason why there are Zeiss, Tamron, Sigma, Samyang AF lenses, why there are metabones, techart, sigma etc... adapters.

Very soon Tokina will join the party with AF lenses.



It's a difference between Sony and most of the other manufacturers, not just Canon. Sony opened their lens mount as a strategic move because they were in an extremely inferior market position relative to Canikon. They needed any and all help they could get to establish their new mirrorless lens mount and system. I have candidly spoken with Sony staff about all these things and everything you saw early with their mirrorless system, like encouraging the use of old manual focus lenses with adapters, or Canon EF with Metabones was solely for the sake of establishing the system, getting uptake and then converting those users to native glass as it became available. If you spend time in the Sony forum, you'll find this is exactly what happened with most early Sony adopters. Many/most ended up transitioning to native lens sets (sure they continue adapting some glass, but in addition to rather than instead of native options).

Canon is in a vastly different market position from where Sony came from. The EF line is extremely established and this time around (compared to the FD-EF transition), they must seriously consider legacy lens compatibility for whatever they offer in FF mirrorless. Fortunately the EF mount is all electronic (interestingly Nikon only just recently went fully electronic) and so far it really hasn't posed a problem to shoot EF lenses either in live view on the newer cameras with DPAF, or on mirrorless offerings such as the M5. I have used the M5 with a range of EF lenses and admittedly, some work better than others. Interestingly, the newer EF lenses seem to be better. And given that many/most Canon users probably have a fairly up-to-date lens inventory, this likely will ease the transition.

Without doubt Canon will want to encourage migration to new lenses for the mirrorless system, and users will mostly be happy to do so. I just don't see why it has to be an either/or situation.



Sep 09, 2017 at 03:22 AM
cgarcia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #3 · p.7 #3 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


A EVF would be indeed nice, for the reasons some have already posted here. Specially because manually focusing in sunny conditions with the rear LCD is a pain. And LCD viewfinder accessories are a mere quick fix.

Unfortunately 60MP are not that many. Even for 8K stills, with 8K monitors/TV just around the corner, we really need much, MUCH more than the theoretical 39MP, to account for the image pipeline imperfections. Specially if they finally remove the AA filter (I hope we still have an AA choice) what we really need are enough pixels to be able to use big apertures with less aliasing risks. In fact the safest approach are many pixels to trade (apparently) a few for an AA filter. I say apparently because the AA-less trend is much hype in my opinion; most of the real detail (not the fake detail caused by undersampling with insufficient pixels) is still there after proper shapening.

Of course, not all are willing to handle huge files (50MP SRAW would be Ok?) and not all are accustomed to look at the image level noise instead of pixel peeping. But I would vote for 80MP or more (I understand that Canon may reach 200MP and above someday, but this will require gradual public acceptance and... first of all... many incremental upgrade cycles).

The 5DS2 will be likely my next upgrade from the 6D, unless Canon does it so wrong that I finally go the Metabones route. I'm just patiently waiting their next movement.



Sep 09, 2017 at 05:09 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #4 · p.7 #4 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


double-post deleted

Edited on Sep 17, 2017 at 05:48 PM · View previous versions



Sep 09, 2017 at 08:43 PM
gdanmitchell
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #5 · p.7 #5 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


There are reasons for camera manufacturers to continue to increase MP count, especially since the continual technological advances tend to allow this without increased cost and without loss in other image quality parameters.

However, I'm puzzled by the "60MP are not that many" statement. With a 50+MP full frame camera and good technique you can already produce excellent 40" x 60" prints. Current high MP cameras produce beautiful images at those big apertures and aliasing is rarely a problem these days — frankly, I virtually never see it any more. (Can't say that it won't ever happen, but it is vanishingly rare.) The choice to forego AA filters is certainly not hype. Camera manufacturers and photographers have realized that they are not really an advantage at this point.

The noise issue is, speaking as someone who used his first digital camera about two decades ago, not really much of an issue at all, and this is especially so with the high MP cameras where whatever noise their may be has a finer "grain" than with older lower MP cameras.

We're really in a very good spot right now in terms of photography technology. Things can get even better, for sure, but there is little to hold us back with current camera tech.

Take care.

cgarcia wrote:
A EVF would be indeed nice, for the reasons some have already posted here. Specially because manually focusing in sunny conditions with the rear LCD is a pain. And LCD viewfinder accessories are a mere quick fix.

Unfortunately 60MP are not that many. Even for 8K stills, with 8K monitors/TV just around the corner, we really need much, MUCH more than the theoretical 39MP, to account for the image pipeline imperfections. Specially if they finally remove the AA filter (I hope we still have an AA choice) what we really need are enough pixels to be able to use big apertures
...Show more



Sep 09, 2017 at 08:43 PM
AJSJones
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #6 · p.7 #6 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


cgarcia wrote:
A EVF would be indeed nice, for the reasons some have already posted here. Specially because manually focusing in sunny conditions with the rear LCD is a pain. And LCD viewfinder accessories are a mere quick fix.

Having recently purchased a large OLED TV (much more betterer than LCD) , I was reminded of (and eventually found) this post from 2009 about the possibility of an OLED hybrid EVF/OVF One of the keys has been processor speed to keep the lag between real life and screen down to a usable number of milliseconds. However, that is only really critical for fast action. (Then all you need is a running buffer like Olympus has (hit the shutter button and record the 14 frames BEFORE the press and a set number after). Technology trickles down slowly...




Sep 09, 2017 at 08:59 PM
pshyvers
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #7 · p.7 #7 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


Pixel Perfect wrote:
The profits margins at the high end are enormous on the D5 and 1DXII cameras, more than 50%.


I'm guessing that's gross margin though, i.e. sales price vs manufacturing cost; they still have to recoup the R&D.



Sep 09, 2017 at 09:49 PM
dreamlander
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #8 · p.7 #8 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


I love the the idea of a hybrid EVF/OVF, but only if they can do it without giving up more than 1/3 stop of light.

What I would really like is IBIS! So just take out the mirror and be done with it.



Sep 09, 2017 at 10:30 PM
AJSJones
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #9 · p.7 #9 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


dreamlander wrote:
I love the the idea of a hybrid EVF/OVF, but only if they can do it without giving up more than 1/3 stop of light.
.
It would have to be one or the other - OLED when mirror is up, optical when mirror is down (the OLED could add info (from the exposure and AF arrays under the secondary mirror etc) but not the whole image while mirror is down)...



Sep 10, 2017 at 12:02 AM
dreamlander
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #10 · p.7 #10 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?




AJSJones wrote:
It would have to be one or the other - OLED when mirror is up, optical when mirror is down (the OLED could add info (from the exposure and AF arrays under the secondary mirror etc) but not the whole image while mirror is down)...


Not sure if it woild have to be that way. I thought the Sony a99 has a transparent mirror that stays down. Never seen one, and maybe I am misunderstanding how that camera works.
Are there some other hybrid vf examples out there?



Sep 10, 2017 at 02:48 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



AJSJones
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #11 · p.7 #11 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


dreamlander wrote:
Not sure if it woild have to be that way. I thought the Sony a99 has a transparent mirror that stays down. Never seen one, and maybe I am misunderstanding how that camera works.
Are there some other hybrid vf examples out there?

Didn't Canon have a pellicle camera at one point? Anywy, if you have the EVF on, the shutter has to be open (if you use the main sensor to capture the live image) and the mirror up so the sensor gets the incoming image. A pellicle situation would allow both at the same time but they'd interfere. You'd have the benefit of not having to raise the mirror to switch between the two images, though you'd still need some way to block the optical image. I've not seen a hybrid VF yet. Some use a gizmo over the rear LCD to make the Live View into a big viewfinder (Zacuto is one maker, I think) where you get the benefit of live view (and its additional info and zoom capabilities etc) in something at your eye. The market for a hybrid (OLED on one face of the pentaprism) is likely to be too small for the premium it would need to be sold for...



Sep 10, 2017 at 04:29 AM
molson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #12 · p.7 #12 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


AJSJones wrote:
Didn't Canon have a pellicle camera at one point?



Several... Including the EOS 1nRS, EOS RT, Pellix, and at least one high-speed version of the F1.



Sep 10, 2017 at 04:42 AM
AJSJones
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #13 · p.7 #13 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


molson wrote:
Several... Including the EOS 1nRS, EOS RT, Pellix, and at least one high-speed version of the F1.

Thanks - my memory is not all it once was: (I can't even remember what I just forgot)



Sep 10, 2017 at 05:06 AM
artificialyello
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #14 · p.7 #14 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


nekrosoft13 wrote:
as long as flange distance is similar and they figure out Canon AF system its possible.

This is the difference between Canon and Sony

Canon doesn't want to help other lens manufactures to get their lenses working on Canon cameras, hence the frequent issues when new models come out.

Tamron, Sigma etc... have to reverse engineer the AF system.


The EF to EF-M adapter is wired but dumb so no new reengineering is necessary. However: There could be a design patent for the electronic contacts in the EF-M mount.

Samyang and others sells dumb and unwired lenses with the EF-M mount.



Sep 10, 2017 at 09:44 AM
melcat
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #15 · p.7 #15 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


cgarcia wrote:
Unfortunately 60MP are not that many. Even for 8K stills, with 8K monitors/TV just around the corner, we really need much, MUCH more than the theoretical 39MP, to account for the image pipeline imperfections.


I make it 33Mpx, and not "just around the corner" unless your definition of that is ten years away.

I could buy a 4K screen tomorrow, but there's no point whatsoever because clearly the studios are unwilling to issue UHD on optical media, and 1080p is already at the limit of what my internet connection can stream. Even at 1080p I hear a noticeable quality drop on the soundtrack compared to lossless audio on Blu-Ray, which leads me to suspect if I could get 4K it might also be overcompressed.

I'm williing to believe Spain has better internet than Australia, but still even 4K is not going to be universal and I doubt 8K will be more than a minority interest any time in the next 20 years.

Specially if they finally remove the AA filter (I hope we still have an AA choice) what we really need are enough pixels to be able to use big apertures with less aliasing risks. In fact the safest approach are many pixels to trade (apparently) a few for an AA filter. I say apparently because the AA-less trend is much hype in my opinion; most of the real detail (not the fake detail caused by undersampling with insufficient pixels) is still there after proper shapening.

This seems backwards reasoning to me. If you believe the maths behind the AA filter, as you clearly do, why not just keep the AA filter? It's not even new maths, the phone company did it half a century ago. But then we live in an age where entire major cities are at risk from weather events and people still don't want to believe the maths that said it was going to happen.

Overall, I'm on the fence over high resolution. I have my first box of "big paper" sitting there, and will see whether it changes my mind. Up to now, I've preferred A4 or smaller photos.



Sep 10, 2017 at 12:30 PM
artificialyello
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #16 · p.7 #16 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


@melcat:

Since a 60MP sensor would outresolve almost any lense Canon have ever made the lenses would be defacto AA filters and extra superficial totally unwarranted! Problem for Otus users acoming...

Don't worry: I'm here to help! :-))

https://www.ebay.com/sch/Filters/15216/i.html?_from=R40&_dcat=15216&Filter%2520Effects=Soft%2520Focus&_nkw=soft&_sop=15



Sep 10, 2017 at 12:49 PM
melcat
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #17 · p.7 #17 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


artificialyello wrote:
Since a 60MP sensor would outresolve almost any lense Canon have ever made the lenses would be defacto AA filters


Very high resolution (I suspect much more than 60Mpx) would eventually obviate the need for the AA filter, due to lens softness, but it is not a reason for high Mpx when the AA filter method is already available.



Sep 10, 2017 at 01:37 PM
AJSJones
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #18 · p.7 #18 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


artificialyello wrote:
@melcat@:

Since a 60MP sensor would outresolve almost any lense Canon have ever made the lenses would be defacto AA filters and extra superficial totally unwarranted! Problem for Otus users acoming...

Don't worry: I'm here to help! :-))



The word "outresolve" needs to used carefully. Adding more resolution to either the lens or to the sensor results in improved image resolution/acquisition from the combination. As either one approaches the limit of its capabiliaties, the improvement may be less than "theoretical" but it's still an imporvement. How worthwhile is a separate debate



Sep 10, 2017 at 05:06 PM
cgarcia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #19 · p.7 #19 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


gdanmitchell wrote:
There are reasons for camera manufacturers to continue to increase MP count, especially since the continual technological advances tend to allow this without increased cost and without loss in other image quality parameters.

However, I'm puzzled by the "60MP are not that many" statement. With a 50+MP full frame camera and good technique you can already produce excellent 40" x 60" prints. Current high MP cameras produce beautiful images at those big apertures and aliasing is rarely a problem these days — frankly, I virtually never see it any more. (Can't say that it won't ever happen, but it is vanishingly
...Show more

50MP are only a 13% above the 8K horizontal resolution, which I assume not enough to account for all the imperfections. I more than suspect that more pixels would look even better once downsized.

About AA not being a problem today, take a look specially at the left balconys (the far platform at the left) in this image. They are totally unaceptable:

https://3.img-dpreview.com/files/p/TS8256x6192~sample_galleries/7707853581/3016826142.jpg

One could argue that the photo could have been taken stopped down instead of using F4... but such F2 lens has likely the maximum sharpness at F2.8 or F4 (the GFX50S has a pixel pitch of 5.33 compared to 4.14 on the 5DS, but that difference would be counterbalanced by merely using F3.2 in a 5DSR).

There is a good reason because a music CD is sampled at 44KHz and then low-pass filtered at 20KHz: our ears neither want artifacts. The above disaster could have been solved by using a 100MP or 200MP sensor strongly enough AA filtered into the same final 50MP. And with even more (real) detail, because some of the apparent detail in the forest is not really there (it is also invented, despite fortunately didn't end in moire and nobody can notice the fact). Current image AA filters are too weak (maybe one of the reasons they are not effective enough, causing some people to ask for their removal).

Unfortunately we moan about huge image files and want every bit of potential resolution (the reason because many prefer the 5DSR over the 5DS). I think that it is not difficult to manufacture sensors with tiny pixels (see the smarphones) and files could be kept smaller, if necessary, by in-camera RAW downsizing. The only tradeof is power consumption and performance. Hope that someday manufacturers will create truly different products for different customers (a landscape camera doesn't needs 6 or 12fps) instead of segmentating the market by hardware and firmware crippling a single product.

A good read against the AA-less propaganda:

http://www.martin-doppelbauer.de/foto/tippstricks/aliasfilter/index.html



Sep 10, 2017 at 10:45 PM
cgarcia
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.7 #20 · p.7 #20 · Are you ready for the Canon 5DS R MARK II?


melcat wrote:
I make it 33Mpx, and not "just around the corner" unless your definition of that is ten years away.

I could buy a 4K screen tomorrow, but there's no point whatsoever because clearly the studios are unwilling to issue UHD on optical media, and 1080p is already at the limit of what my internet connection can stream. Even at 1080p I hear a noticeable quality drop on the soundtrack compared to lossless audio on Blu-Ray, which leads me to suspect if I could get 4K it might also be overcompressed.

I'm williing to believe Spain has better internet than Australia, but still
...Show more

No, in Spain networks also aren't fast... and there are even more problems (some spaniards subscribe to US Netflix with proxying techniques, because the studios treat us as second or third class citizens). But Internet limited speeds are limited by time (do you remember the 14.4K modems?).

For video content, an 8K TV as no real benefit over 4K at the common viewing distances, at least for most people. However, manufacturers seem willing to create such a product, and "officially" it is the practical limit for the human vision (most agree that only 360 degree projections would need more pixels). People will learn the lesson (4K and 8K videos look exactly equal) and likely they'll never be fooled to pay for 16K. I think that 8K has a lot of chances of being the finish line of the TV resolution race. Computer monitors have until recently had a bandwidth problem, but upgraded connection interfaces are about to commercially appear, capable to support 8K.

So... what is so special about 8K?

I must confess that almost never print photos. My LCD is much cheaper (and ecological) and better looking, specially in dynamic range. But I admit that I enjoy printed photos because you can see as many detail as you want... simply by inspecting them closer. With a monitor, you soon reach a limit: you need to press keys and zoom the image... because the monitor has not the full camera resolution (I still have a 2K monitor... my PC HDMI doesn't support more). I'd really like a monitor with the camera resolution, so that I could occasionally see more detail by inspecting the image closer, just as with a printed photo.

This is the reason I have "standarized" 8K as my nirvana resolution. Currently there aren't monitors that good, and neither my 6D reachs that level, but I won't buy another camera with less than 50MP. Sooner than later 8K monitors and TV will be there, and your full size pictures will obviously look better on close inspection on such devices, provided they were taken by a huge megapixel camera.



Sep 10, 2017 at 11:30 PM
1       2       3              6      
7
       8              10       11       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              6      
7
       8              10       11       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password