hatch1921 wrote:
Not as amazing as the shots Oliver posted... but.. he did motivate me to go shoot some closeup and macro shots at the Butterfly Wonderland here in town.
I used the Zeiss 135mm and the Sigma 150mm macro. It's 85% humidity in the atrium. YUCK! but it keeps the butterflies happy and healthy.
On to the shots. ( I haven't shot macro in over a year.. be gentle)
But, clearly, manual focusing with the 5DS does not pose a major problem as evidenced by your wonderful captures with the Zeiss 2/135mm ZE.
Hatch, you are really selling the 5DS for me. Gorgeous captures!
darbo wrote:
But, clearly, manual focusing with the 5DS does not pose a major problem as evidenced by your wonderful captures with the Zeiss 2/135mm ZE.
Hatch, you are really selling the 5DS for me. Gorgeous captures!
Many thanks Darbo. I MF on the Sigma as well... the Zeiss is a pleasure to shoot. Focus ring is super smooth.. the lens is the best lens I've personally ever shot. Shooting MF takes some practice. Shooting the Zeiss @ F/2.0 is a fun challenge. Would I use the lens for sports or anything which is fast moving? Nope... but I'm sure people do. My style of shooting... this lens fits me. Looking to buy the Zeiss 50mm F/2 soon...
I like my AF lenses and the 5Ds is doing a great job hitting the mark.
The 5Ds... if you are in the market... it's a fantastic camera. Just shoot it like you would any other camera. I haven't faced any issues hand-held or otherwise. I do like using the monopod or tripod when it allows ... but... crank up the shutter speed and it's no different than any other camera IMO.
snapsy wrote:
He's only had the camera a few days but does make some initial observations in the article about it:
* Better grip than D810
* 40mm f/2.8 STM performs well on it
* AF more customizable and more precise than D810 * VF not good for MF
* DR better than expect but short of the D810
EB-1 wrote:
Really? It's 2015 not 1975. Canon has only a handful of MF lenses for good reason. The 5D as other EOS series is an AF camera. Why would Canon design new bodies oriented to manual focus as was popular in the 19th-20th centuries?
However, if the AF is not up to par that's a different issue that needs to be addressed.
EBH
snapsy wrote:
Because even the best PDAF system available today (5DM3/1DX) doesn't have the precision needed to produce peak MTF focus movement on a consistent basis. For example the 5DM3 has the best PDAF precision I've ever used yet if you lookup Roger C's AF consistency tests you'll see a non-trivial spread of measured MTFs across multiple AF cycles. And that's at only 22MP. Unless the 5DS has made a considerable leap in precision that means it will require even more care in focusing to produce maximum resolution.
That's what I'm concerned about. Perhaps the 5Ds/R should have received a new AF module, but that would be the 5D IV and later to market. I think this body needs the lenses set to f/7-8 for best compromise of IQ and not too much diffraction. I never shoot wider than f/4, so I hope the AF is good enough. I expected more AF complaints already, but we'll see. MF is just too unproductive for my limited time on location. Although I focus tracked the running species in the 70s-80s manually, I'm too old for that hassle now.
EB-1 wrote:
That's what I'm concerned about. Perhaps the 5Ds/R should have received a new AF module, but that would be the 5D IV and later to market. I think this body needs the lenses set to f/7-8 for best compromise of IQ and not too much diffraction. I never shoot wider than f/4, so I hope the AF is good enough. I expected more AF complaints already, but we'll see. MF is just too unproductive for my limited time on location. Although I focus tracked the running species in the 70s-80s manually, I'm too old for that hassle now.
EBH
Having shot the camera now at a range of apertures, your concern about limiting to f/7-8 is overblown. I got very good results at f/11 and fine results at f/16 in a recent day of landscape shooting. If I'm shooting a subject where depth of field or exposure issues do not compel me to do otherwise, I'll likely shoot at f/8. If I need to shoot at a different aperture I will, and the results are fine.
Maybe instead of guessing how the AF might work, it would be a good idea to wait for some actual evidence.
gdanmitchell wrote:
Having shot the camera now at a range of apertures, your concern about limiting to f/7-8 is overblown. I got very good results at f/11 and fine results at f/16 in a recent day of landscape shooting. If I'm shooting a subject where depth of field or exposure issues do not compel me to do otherwise, I'll likely shoot at f/8. If I need to shoot at a different aperture I will, and the results are fine.
Maybe instead of guessing how the AF might work, it would be a good idea to wait for some actual evidence.
Dan
My car just had an incident on the way home, so I'm putting the 5DsR testing on hold for the moment.
I took these sunset shots yesterday, the color, transition, contrast, tone, ... in the file can provide big room for post processing, I'm very happy with it, but when compare to 1Dx when doing similar pictures, the room for post process in shadow and dark tone from 1Dx is still a bit better (except the little banding in the shadow of 1Dx), I think it is due to the pixel well is much bigger.
Let me start by saying I haven't fully vetted the issue but I would like to know if anyone ... on any camera has faced this issue before. It's a new one to me. I've never had focus issues with an ND filter on.
So... toady I was just taking some practice shots with my wife in the pool. I recently purchased a 8 stop variable ND filter for an upcoming trip to Oregon. I ... of course want to be able to slow things down for the waterfall/river/ocean shots.
I've used a VND in the past and have not had an issue.
For these images I'm shooting the Zeiss 135mm T* When I "lock" focus the camera is set to illuminate and beep. I put the filter on... not a single shot is in focus. Take the filter off... 90% of the images are tack sharp.. the few I missed were user error.
So... I wonder how I'm getting a false focus lock reading with the ND filter on? Have you all experienced this before?
I haven't tried the filter with the AF lenses I have... that would at least narrow out AF vs MF....
The weather kicked up and we had to stop shooting.
Here are some sample shots below... full res... and 100% crops. Keep in mind... just snap shots... testing out the ND filter. I of course want to use it with the Zeiss on shoots ...so I can shoot wide open with the strobe and sun.
I think I've sold the mystery... It's the filter. On my 85mm I can't hit a shot with AF... tripod... flash... nada. Take the fitler off... crisp images. So... I'll give another brand a try. I purchased a "Promaster" VND $200 locally when I should have just went with what I know and picked up a B&W or Heliopan.
here is a eastern meadowlark pretty far away, sitting in a field. followed by it is a 100% crop. is the bird sharp? not the sharpest, but way better than what i can get digiscoping. also look at the detail in the grass. this camera is turning out to be a great machine.
I'm still enjoying the 5DS and have come to the conclusion thatI'm going to sell my 5D iii now. I was worried that the 5DS was going to be more difficult to use but I'm not finding that. This morning whilst walking the dog I found some bee orchids. Using the Canon 100mm L macro I took the below shot. 29 handheld images stacked. The stack hasn't worked 100% but that's not the camera's fault.
Seems to be in line with my experience and what I predict: The R version can produce slightly greater sharpness in some cases, though the difference is minimal. The R version can produce a bit more moire/aliasing in some cases, though it is more a matter of how much rather than moire or no moire.
but it keeps the butterflies happy and healthy. 
