dhphoto wrote:
If I were to buy a 5DS/R one of the benefits I would like would be the ability to make a 33 meg square image.
That would be useful.
Which is the same as to say that 50 MP sensor is useful. I think you want this camera, and try to keep that desire down by rationalizing against it. Which is a wise thing to do in general
alundeb wrote:
Which is the same as to say that 50 MP sensor is useful. I think you want this camera, and try to keep that desire down by rationalizing against it. Which is a wise thing to do in general
I have considered trying to justify the purchase ( which I could easily afford to make) but I simply can't.
My stuff gets printed large already, I would need a new pc, new memory cards etc to achieve very little or no real improvement on my workflow or finished results.
dhphoto wrote:
I have considered trying to justify the purchase ( which I could easily afford to make) but I simply can't.
My stuff gets printed large already, I would need a new pc, new memory cards etc to achieve very little or no real improvement on my workflow or finished results.
They are niche cameras but I'm not the niche
May I ask why you need new memory cards and why that would have to be expensive ones? I use the 128 GB SD UHS-I card I bought 3 years ago for $160 and it does not limit me.
alundeb wrote:
May I ask why you need new memory cards and why that would have to be expensive ones? I use the 128 GB SD UHS-I card I bought 3 years ago for $160 and it does not limit me.
Because until now I purposely never use bigger than 16 GB
Jeff Nolten wrote:
Really Konablue? If you set 1.6 crop mode in a 5DS you get the same view through the viewfinder as the 7D2? How does it do that? There is a zoom mechanism in the viewfinder optics? Great news if its true. I'll be looking through the 5DS user manual to see what it says.
Jeff Nolten, unfortunately it is not true. I read the manual and on page 154 the way it is written gave me the impression that it did increase the zoom in the viewfinder but I tried it on my 5DSR and found it doesn't work that way. I should have tested in my camera before posting. Since I was wrong about this I deleted my original post. Thanks for setting me straight.
Thanks Konablue. Its really a tough choice between the two cameras for me, mostly because I'm quite happy with my 5D3. So it comes down to who handles the 100-400 better. Not everyone's priority I know. The crop mode viewfinder FOV and outer AF points are a major consideration. Fortunately, I don't have to make the decision this year since I've already blown this years gears allowance on lenses. The new year is only three months away!
Konablue wrote:
Jeff Nolten, unfortunately it is not true. I read the manual and on page 154 the way it is written gave me the impression that it did increase the zoom in the viewfinder but I tried it on my 5DSR and found it doesn't work that way. I should have tested in my camera before posting. Since I was wrong about this I deleted my original post. Thanks for setting me straight.
In the crop modes, the rear LCD panel in live view does show the cropped version of the image. I typically shoot landscape photographs with a 4:3 aspect ratio in mind, and I most often use live view for that sort of photography, so this is very useful to me.
It would be wonderful if Canon added some indication of the cropped image margins in the viewfinder display. It should be possible since the display does overlay some similar information, such as the grid pattern, when the camera is on.
rdcny wrote:
On the other hand, while 800 iso is smooth and looks great - for me 1600 iso is on the borderline of being too grainy (noisy)...the Sony sensor (eg., the RX-1 that I owned for more than a year) did not produce images this noisy at 1600 iso.
When considering noise/grain on 5Ds and 5DsR images, do also keep in mind that when you are looking at a print rather than a 100% magnification crop the size of the 5Ds/5DsR noise/grain will be significantly smaller than it would be in a similar image from a lower resolution camera.
dhphoto wrote:
Because until now I purposely never use bigger than 16 GB
I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here, if may.
First off, I understand your reluctance!
I'm pretty frugal and conservative with gear, frequently buying used. With my 5D2 and 1Ds3, I use Transcend 32GB cards. For my higher MP D800e, I use a Delkin 64GB. All were purchased used on eBay and work wonderfully. I also have several 16GB (and even 8GB) for use in a pinch. I don't find the cost excessive -- the 64GB was about $60 a few months back, the 32's considerably less. The 64 gives me 800 RAW files on the Nikon's 36MP sensor, so the Canon would be less, but still probably around 500. I seldom shoot more than 300 image files, so these work fine for me and I can add more to my bag if needed.
I'm still limping along on a Lenovo desktop I bought a few years ago with Win 8.1. It seems to handle the files fine in LR6CC -- maybe a little slow, but not bad -- certainly didn't need an upgrade right away. You may have an out of date machine that is on the edge of collapse, but I doubt it! I'm sure you will be fine through an adjustment period before buying/building a super machine.
So, I've had the same or similar concerns about the higher MP cameras, but find, having dipped my toe in, the water is fine. The Nikon's files are really irresistible, and I'm confident the Canon's are the same. The detail and smoothness of transitions and cleanliness of shadows is impressive and I just want to make the sharpest images possible, even if they are down rezzed -- they still look great, better than the lower MP bodies. It reinvigorates my approach and outlook. I'm sure the Canon will be nicer for LV and a number of other things I struggle with on the Nikon, making it easier and more pleasant to use.
I'm still keeping my 1Ds3, and even 1D3 for smaller image files -- these are great for events and fast-paced work, and still offer that fast turnaround on PP and file size for clients. But the big MP camera is the next wave, and it's best to get on now, IMO.
I'm waiting a bit for Canon prices to come down and may look for a "simple" 5Ds for architecture and detailed technical work. I'm sure it will be awesome for twilight city shots and other things I enjoy like landscape and multi-shot panoramas.
Good luck on whenever you decide to take the plunge. But for quality technical work, I see it as inevitable that you will move that direction.
Gunzorro wrote:
Good luck on whenever you decide to take the plunge. But for quality technical work, I see it as inevitable that you will move that direction.
Maybe but as of now I won't be changing up.
My digital upgrade path has been steep since 2003 but what I have now does the work I do, so I have no reason to change.
It's a pragmatic decision, I just don't need the expense, change in workflow, proceesing power etc. however nice the files are - it won't earn me any extra money and that's the bottom line.
Gunzorro wrote:
I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here, if may.
First off, I understand your reluctance!
I'm pretty frugal and conservative with gear, frequently buying used. With my 5D2 and 1Ds3, I use Transcend 32GB cards. For my higher MP D800e, I use a Delkin 64GB. All were purchased used on eBay and work wonderfully. I also have several 16GB (and even 8GB) for use in a pinch. I don't find the cost excessive -- the 64GB was about $60 a few months back, the 32's considerably less. The 64 gives me 800 RAW files on the Nikon's 36MP sensor, so the Canon would be less, but still probably around 500. I seldom shoot more than 300 image files, so these work fine for me and I can add more to my bag if needed.
I'm still limping along on a Lenovo desktop I bought a few years ago with Win 8.1. It seems to handle the files fine in LR6CC -- maybe a little slow, but not bad -- certainly didn't need an upgrade right away. You may have an out of date machine that is on the edge of collapse, but I doubt it! I'm sure you will be fine through an adjustment period before buying/building a super machine.
So, I've had the same or similar concerns about the higher MP cameras, but find, having dipped my toe in, the water is fine. The Nikon's files are really irresistible, and I'm confident the Canon's are the same. The detail and smoothness of transitions and cleanliness of shadows is impressive and I just want to make the sharpest images possible, even if they are down rezzed -- they still look great, better than the lower MP bodies. It reinvigorates my approach and outlook. I'm sure the Canon will be nicer for LV and a number of other things I struggle with on the Nikon, making it easier and more pleasant to use.
I'm still keeping my 1Ds3, and even 1D3 for smaller image files -- these are great for events and fast-paced work, and still offer that fast turnaround on PP and file size for clients. But the big MP camera is the next wave, and it's best to get on now, IMO.
I'm waiting a bit for Canon prices to come down and may look for a "simple" 5Ds for architecture and detailed technical work. I'm sure it will be awesome for twilight city shots and other things I enjoy like landscape and multi-shot panoramas.
Good luck on whenever you decide to take the plunge. But for quality technical work, I see it as inevitable that you will move that direction. ...Show more →
I just paid $57 on Amazon for 128GB 94 write speed SDXC card
gdanmitchell wrote:
...It would be wonderful if Canon added some indication of the cropped image margins in the viewfinder display. It should be possible since the display does overlay some similar information, such as the grid pattern, when the camera is on.
Dan
Doesn't the "MASKED" or "OUTLINED" modes provide the appropriate indication of the cropped image margins in the viewfinder? For example; in 4.3 crop mode you have the left and right sidebars or indicator lines displayed in the viewfinder. Or in 1.6 crop mode you have a frame or lines (as selected) that indicate the cropped area
mogul wrote:
I just paid $57 on Amazon for 128GB 94 write speed SDXC card
Congrats! Yes, those SD cards are quite a bit cheaper. The CF had a way to go price-wise, but they still have a speed advantage. I expect with new demand for high GB cards, the prices will be coming down dramatically in the next year or so.
Gunzorro wrote:
Congrats! Yes, those SD cards are quite a bit cheaper. The CF had a way to go price-wise, but they still have a speed advantage. I expect with new demand for high GB cards, the prices will be coming down dramatically in the next year or so.
Since I use CF and SD, it sure seems that CF is a legacy card now and the retailers are keeping the price high for those that have to use them. By the way, those pins are a real anarchism.
5Ds images with the 600mm F4 (Version II) - from 1 October 2015 - shot in the Bronx at Pelham Bay Park
Osprey at 800 ISO; F4 and 1/2000 second speed
Laughing Gull (adult winter plumage) also at 800 ISO; F4 and 1/2000 sec
5Ds does 800 ISO well to my eye. The great difference between images with this camera vs. the 5D3 is that areas that are slightly underexposed do not have a color cast (to greenish or yellowish) that the 5D3 had.
The extra megapixels also make a big difference - one can use a higher degree of nosie reduction yet still retain detail to sharpen.
Osprey at 800 ISO with 5Ds
Laughing Gull (adult in winter plumage) at 800 ISO with the 5Ds
Konablue wrote:
Doesn't the "MASKED" or "OUTLINED" modes provide the appropriate indication of the cropped image margins in the viewfinder? For example; in 4.3 crop mode you have the left and right sidebars or indicator lines displayed in the viewfinder. Or in 1.6 crop mode you have a frame or lines (as selected) that indicate the cropped area
I'm not aware of those modes — maybe I need to look more closely at my manual!?
There is an aspect ratio setting, which set to 4:3 — this produces the cropped LCD view in live view.
I'm sure you will be fine through an adjustment period before buying/building a super machine. 
