Canon 5DS & 5DS-R - pointless or outstanding?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 вер 2024
- You can stay up to date with Matts latest work at www.mattgrange... - join the mailing list!
Check out the Nikon Expert Setup Guide: learn.mattgran...
/ _mattgranger
/ mattgranger
Check it out at Amazon: geni.us/5DSr
Shot with one of these about a month ago and it's amazing. Printing a 24x36 poster and the image quality was off the charts.
It seems to me that the only people who claim that these high megapixel cameras are unnecessary are people who aren't typically shooting print and or billboards.
The real question I have is why wouldn't you want the most megapixels possible to therefore capture as much information as possible.
High Speed Magazine Or people that don't have one nor could afford to buy one.
That was your best and most real video yet. I use my cameras to make money and I shot a 5dc, 5dmkii, and now a 6d and they all worked great. I think people need to be realistic on their photography goals and used what fits them. I also use apsc, m43, 35mm, and mf and if you understand the limitations of the the camera/format there is no issues. If the low light af is as good as the 6D(I bought it over the 5dmkiii because -3ev was more important than tracking) and it's 50+ mp, I will buy it, plus I don't use over iso6400.
I fully agree with your comments Matt. Personally I would love to have this camera, I live for shooting landscapes and cityscapes, plus portraits. Don't care what anyone says, more detail and sharpness is ALWAYS welcome. Who cares about the file size, I shoot panoramas all the time, Common to have 100 to 150MP files.. One thing is for sure, there are only a handful of really good lenses out there that will do these cameras justice. But think the most recent ones from Canon will be just fine..
"If you shoot sports with it then its a sport camera"
...and that's why I watch Matt's videos.
Increasing megapixel of a camera is not as significant as the number would suggest. For the sake of numerical comparison, a 24mp camera would have pixel dimension of 6000x4000. A 48mp (doubling the megapixel) camera (this would be close to the new Canons) would have pixel dimension of 8485x5657. That is really only about 1/3 of the frame, well within a shooter's ability to compose well, without the need of excessive cropping. Matt put out a great point about which lenses will actually be sharp enough to take advantage of resolution of the sensor as well. And apparently, given the iso range, Canon is sacrificing some 3 stops of low light performance (?) compared to their own 5Diii. Is that a good trade off between 1/3 of a frame extra resolution vs losing 3 stops of low light performance?
Really misleading.
You wouldn't this camera in situations where you need high iso. So the loss in low light capability doesn't matter for it's intended users. I doubt anyone would want to use it in situations where you'd need higher than iso 400.
But it's higher resolution might make higher iso more viable because it might make noise less visible due to the increased pixels. I saw that in the d800's 36mp images compared to 22mp images.
jjk9999 You are right. And this seems to be Canon's direction as well. Supposedly, the next 5D "mark 4" may actually be lower in pixels but significantly higher iso capability, so kind of in line with Sony A7s. They expect these 5D r & s would be used for products photography and such, where the user will have more control of lighting or camera on a tripod where lower iso can be used. There were some rumors that the filters used on these cameras were denser, hence more color accurate, but also preventing a higher iso range. Other than that, these sensors are basically the same as the 7Dii and 70D, just manufactured towards full frame.
I agree with the reducing the image from a higher mega pixel will reduce the appearance of noise pattern, however, it will not correct to color and or dynamic lost. Of course, a lot of those can be made up in post, therefore, opening up another set of conversation.
As an aside, it would be nice if these camera would have a higher frame rate. The one application where a high res is great is in sports, where cropping is very useful. I guess that will be the next 1Dx(2)?
Shaun Go re mk iv lower pixels higher iso capability. I have to agree that would be desired by many. I got my 5d II to do fine art but eventually found myself in demand to shoot performances. Most of my work gets downsized at least 40% before anyone sees it - but because of low light situations the full frame is superior to apsc.
Some people don't care about low light performance. I'm an Architectural photographer, I use a tripod and shoot long exposures... If I want to shoot quick to drop in people or something I crank the ISO, open up, lay on the noise reduction and paint in the people with a vector mask.. Resolution is king.
Re: smaller lenses. Generally you cannot use Canon aps-c lenses on Canon full frame because ef-s cannot be mounted on ef cameras. Sigma/Tamron aps-c usually work though because they aren't protruding as far back as Canon EF-S do.
"If you shoot sports with it it's a sports camera" hahahahah!!!!!!!!!!! that was funny and true!
It's only pointless if you don't point it at anything.....
I feel its time for Canon and Nikon or even Sony to get into medium format cameras and bring a reasonably price camera to market not some 30,000 plus from Hassy. Give them a run for their money.
Pentax has a "cheap" one and there are rumors about a Mamiya/Sony MF RX-like camera. Apart from that, Sony and Leica are the only sensor manufacturers of the current generation.
ibanezrg470
Thats true. The only way for medium format sensors to become cheaper is for the main players to get involved
Lenses. Even Canon would have problem with that. Their current EF lenses would not do for MF. And they would need a new mount for that as well. Pentax was doing MF film cameras in the past, so they had some experience in this area. And they are doing a good thing with their MF DSLRs, but I don't think Canon or Nikon are going to join this club anytime soon. Sony might go for it, although they already put sensors in MF, so the question is if they even can make something on their own. Plus, Sony doesn't even have much to offer in terms of their own glass when it comes to 135 format bodies.
David Meyer I wonder if canon or nikon could make a mount that could take pentax lenses with or without adapter? Wouldn't that be good way to enter a new market?
***** You can put possibly every MF lens out there on any current Canon or Nikon camera right now, providing you find an adapter (and I think this wouldn't be too much of a problem unless you have some exotic mount on the lens). And of course you would need to use manual focus. But it's on 135 format bodies. With MF they would have to make a mount with flange focal distance around 60mm to take other MF lenses with an adapter without any corrective optics. I have no doubt both companies have technical means of manufacturing MF cameras with a flange focal distance suitable for using 3rd party lenses. But this still means R&D costs when they already have their products pretty much nailed down, they have their customer base. Pentax seems to be going in circles and trying not to die, so they seem to be trying various things. Like that "budget" MF DSLR, which apparently is a nice camera.
Firstly, you need to design new cameras and new lenses. And this is way more expensive than improving on your existing line-up of camera bodies and lenses. Secondly, you need to invest in a completely new production line instead of adjusting your existing one, both for camera bodies and for optics. Again, not exactly a cheap thing. Thirdly, you have to sell these cameras. They wouldn't cost 3-5k USD a piece like their current products, they would be significantly more expensive, which means they wouldn't be able to count on their current customer / fan base to buy these cameras. With an additional expense of new lenses on top of that. So I think even hardcore Canon or Nikon fans would have a problem ditching their state of the art D800, D4, 5D3 or 1DX and the lenses to get something that's heavier, presumably less portable and worse at both high ISO and fast moving subjects scenarios. Getting rid of, say, 5D3 and 24-70mmL MK2 wouldn't get you even a new MF body from Canon. They could probably count on some of 1DX users, but it's not a huge group and many of them work outside the studio and do sports and wildlife. Therefore if Canon or Nikon were to make a MF cameras, they would have to aim at the people who currently own Hasselblad, Phase One, Leaf or Leica MF camera bodies and lenses. Good luck convincing any person using Hasselblad they should ditch it :) That, and these people are heavily invested in their systems, we are talking about sums around 100k USD and more. A chance of getting a slice of MF market is very slim and both Canon and Nikon know that. That's why they got into making 35mm rangefinders and SLRs in the first place, isn't it?
When I saw that Matt Granger was going to comment on the 5DS and 5DS R, I thought, "Okay. Someone smart enough to cut through the chatter and come up with a valuable analysis." I wasn't disappointed.
I'm tempted. Lots of detail is one of those things I look for in a photograph. There are some great photographers who don't worry about it, but I want to be able to shoot with high detail anyway. And I've been waiting for this camera to be announced. The thought of shooting with the 5DS R hooked onto Canon's 300mm f/2.8 is a huge temptation. You'd be able to count the grains of sand on a beach.
But . . .
My big disappointment is that dynamic range hasn't increased. The edge surely goes to Nikon on this. And this is one of the reasons I've been thinking of switching to Nikon. The D810 is still the IQ champion for me. But the idea of replacing all my lenses holds me back.
It's not that 50 megapixels isn't useful. It would be. But that's not enough. And it appears that the 50 MP is just about all the advantage the 5DS and 5DS R offer.
Matt, you do look tired.
I like the approach of asking if its being necessary is necessary :) I guess to 99% of customers (with the exception of full time pros) no camera is necessary... But we love to have them, we love to use them and we love to have the best of the best of the best.
just back from Masai Mara in Kenya and got some great outdoor shots (and crops) with the 5Ds and a Canon 100 - 400 MkII lens. Camera shake is more noticeable with the the 50 Mp sensor though so a tripod or bean bag to rest on is essential. Great camera though and I am thrilled with it....
Canon 5D series and Nikon D800 series are the only practical and affordable camera bodies for serious photographers.
Also the differ from other camera bodies because there are:
Tones of reviews about this models on Internet and magazines.
Tones of books that teach the cameras much better than their manuals.
Extensive troubleshooting and self repairing informations on Internet.
In the case of Canon 5D there are alternative unofficial firmware magiclantern with extensive possibilities.
The support of firmware updates by canon and Nikon is longer and more frequent.
The ergonomic design remains the same for many many years. A professional photographer doesn't loose time or becomes slower while learning the button position of new models.
These aspects are beyond the typical characteristics an amateur is looking for and they make the difference.
It’s 2022 and I just got one. Been using the MKlll for a while and decided I needed this. Fantastic camera. Landscape and studio work is what I mainly do so it fits my needs perfectly
Well said, I wholeheartedly agree. No ONE photographer fits into the category the armchair togs are referring to when shooting down new products. Personally it could be good fit for me. Something that I dont see many other mention is the USB3 connection now added, which will be great for me as I shoot tethered into CaptureOne.
Agree with the last point of the video. One of the key parts of the system is whether the current lenses are able to resolve and perform to par with the large new high megapixel sensors. Just as I discovered moving from cropped sensor to FF 5D2 - short comings of poorer performing lenses become very clear and apparent.
I have a Canon 5DSR and really love it . It is sharp even with ;older lens,The better the glass the better the picture, the 24-70 IS and 70-200 is II work really well. It takes good video , not why I bought the camera. I believe this camera is for anyone the like good pictures. It was only a thousand more than the 5 D Mark III so why not give it a go, I have had no trouble with low light and mosaic pattern ...Next year they will coming out with something bigger and better...Enjoyed your video. One day they will come out with a digital lens to match the camera...
Matt, I watch a lot of your videos and appreciate the immense effort you put into your channel and your passion for sharing what you do. This video is extremely sensible and there is much truth in what you say here. As photographers we certainly do live in exciting times with the choice that we have with the tools at our disposal.
Finally, someone making sense. Even I don't understand the differentiation of photographers based on gear they use...And most people go on and on about trending fads and waste time.
Matt, agree with most of what you said but must take exception with one issue. Comparing the 5Ds and D800(810) to medium format is specious. M/F not only has the higher density sensors but they also have significantly larger sensors as well as larger lenses. Even more significant is bit depth. Most M/F cameras are 16 bit whereas DSLR's are typically 14 bit. That is 4 times the color depth resolution and largely responsible for all the talk about skin tones being sooo much better on M/F. I own a D800 and after using it for 2 years I can say it has incredible resolution but I'm not sure 36MP are really necessary, particualry when the lenses that feed the sensor are not keeping up. Thanks for all you do for this industry - enjoy your videos!
Imagine all the details in a landscape photo with this!
Quick tip Matt Granger I heard you mention flicker in your video at 24p.
This can easily be resolved! Just set your shutter speed at a multiple of the frequency the power cycles at, so if you are in Europe it's multiples of 50hz (1/25th, 1/50th, 1/100th etc.) and in the US multiples of 60hz (1/30th , 1/60th, 1/120th etc). That should eliminate that god awful flicker in your video. Keep up the good work!
I'm relatively new to watching your channel, maybe started about 6 months ago when I decided to push my photography, and even though I'm a Canon user I still come back and watch your videos mainly for your approach and intelligent grounded outlook - plus you're funny!
Capturing in between flickers in video would only be possible in 25FPs in contras with 50Hz mains frequency. And 30Fps in regions with 60Hz mains. oh, and you can have multiples of the above mentions values. And its not that hard to make such a feature, a standard cellphone processor should have more then enough power to handle this, and a ASIC as the company will most likely do will be even less power demanding.
"Pointless or outstanding?"
BOTH!
Pointless if you use it every-day or for all sorts of purposes. Outstanding if you want a camera specifically for studio or other really well lit situations only.
I don't know why they don't just built a 30mp sensor, with better dynamic range and better iso performance !? I always think when canon is releasing a new camera, they just put some aspects that some users will need in one camera, but to get everything you always have to go for the 1DX. Why don't they just focus on a little bit less, but way better pixels ? You are right the cameras will develop in a lot the future, but the lenses can't develop that fast to hold up with the cameras ( there were great ZEISS lenses 100 years ago! ), so please canon focus more on the pixels them self that on the number of them!
Justus Weiss haha this is comment from 2 years ago, now like you said 5d mark iv have all the things that you want. The iq is far more superior than 5d iii
Canon 5d mark IV hhgahs
I always appreciate your points of view, Matt. I believe that you are technically one of the most accurate guys around and as I mentioned lately in a video I admire the way how you can handle negative comments and keep your cool. You should make a video about the latter. Would be a great tutorial I believe.
Just enjoy photography guys. Whatever gear you use and fits your needs.
I had the 5D... now the 5D 3... skipped the 2... I think I'll skip this one too.
This isn't really a successor for the 5DMK3, this is completely new line-up for Canon. Canon 5DMK4 will(according to rumours) come later this year Q3-Q4.
I agree, which is another reason for me to pass as well. ~Thanks for the input.
I just wrote a long winded comment that basically states the same thing. The 5D mk iv will be canon's 'big' release for 2015 like the 7D Mk ii was 2014's big release. Around summer time we will start getting more of a buzz about the new 5D mk iv. Im hoping its a game changer. Id save and spend $4k on it if it is.
PeeHooo I hope you're right. :)
Life is too short to follow this tecnological "empty wallet" game.
Thought the MP race was over with the D800... Apparently not lol. My computer struggles with 70-100 MB raw files from my D800. I can only imagine how big the files from these cameras are going to be.
I hear rumors that Nikon is announcing stuff soon too... 2015 is going to be interesting.
*gets out popcorn!*
my pc is ok with big raws but it makes storing them for long impossible. ten photos for a gigabyte? not great value
There's a 50mp Sony comming soon according to rumours.. possibly a7r2..
sonicpowergroove nikon and sony have nothing on menu navigation yet. it's not all about censors and megapixels
sonicpowergroove sony makes sensors for nikon but not Canon.. They make their own but I heard sony manufactured this sensor for Canon but the design and development by Canon.. I also heard it's not by Sony as well.. Not sure.. The problem is not every cam from any manufacturer is perfect.. The love for and feel of a dslr is not gonna fade away any near future.. Mirrorless and dslr will slide along for a long time.. Plus, well it's a big plus, the lens line-up and quality for both Canon and nikon from both native and third party is just unbeatable.. Ya there are adaptors but will not perfectly suits.. I know, I have both system.. Well, the fact everyone must understand is dslr or Mirrorless, any brand, we get hell load of options and choices, they are innovating and bringing it to us, it's us who should first decide what we need then what to get.. When you do, In this age or future u r not gonna dissapoint with any system.. I always think why this hate-love talk everytime.
Harikrishnan K M I did hear that SONY & CANON were into an agreement for developing a sensor for a line of Canon cameras.
I do disagree to some extent what Matt was saying, in that these new cameras are aimed more at the Landscape, and Studio photographer, where the light isn't going to factor as much as say an indoor ice hockey game, or basketball where the ISO needs to be cranked up, Canon have said that this is market towards these kind of photographers, so you wouldn't take this camera to those locations i have mentioned, especially if you're a pro. The next Canon will have 28-32MP, with a very high ISO rating and NO 4k either, I have this on a relatively good source and will be out in 2016.
"By 2020, the standard would be 100MP and 1 million ISO."
I'm shocked.
Looks like he was right. Fuji GFX100!!
Um
I still think some of the ergonomics could have changed and been a bit better as well as having a touch screen built in too. Wifi and GPS would have been a great integration too. I like the added resolution because I can stand back further to increase DOF while getting a good bokeh with the background closer and then having the option to crop down to the 5D3 pixel dimensions that can still print incredible images. Can't wait to see a hands on review from you Matt.
If you shoot sports with it then its a sport camera okay? so true
What I want out of a camera is more dynamic range, and lower noise High ISO shooting; fitting smaller pixels on a sensor achieve the exact opposite of what I want, ie noisier images with low dynamic range, so not happy with this release at all, and the way the big 2 camera companies are going in general.
A lot of people thought we might see Cannikon take on mirrorless, but with this release the strategy seems pretty clear... push full-frame into the stratosphere. Unfortunately it's taking the price of admission in the same direction. I have an X-e2. Rather than join the space race I think I'll just save up for more Fuji glass. Still, 2015 should be an interesting year.
"Who's this camera for? Really you should be asking: is this for me?" Absolutely on point, very well said.
The goal of the manufacturer is to market a range of products to a wide, blanket audience that can find their use with a specific product. It's like people project their needs onto products and whine when it's not curtailed to their extremely specific needs. Why in hell would Canon sell a camera aimed at one person?
You are right. 40 years ago, the technology was at 100 percent. Today we have already reached 1,000 percent and will multiply over the next 40 years.Thumbs up.
The more the better, rather it is more frame rate, ISO, storage capacity, recording speed, processing power, and megapixels.
The most average phone can record HD videos and has a 5mp camera, which 10 years ago was extremely exclusive to high end cameras.
The only problem with 5DS is the lens, are there any lenses sharp enough to take advantage of all these megapixels?
Thanks Matt for a very thoughtful review. This isn't a camera for me but I'm sure there are people out there who can't wait to get their hands on that 50 MPix sensor. Even Canon is saying that the high ISO performance on this is more on par with the 7DII than the 5DIII and for what I shoot I would take a clean ISO3200 over the ability to crop from 50 MPix any day. I currently work with a 5DIII and have a 5DII as a backup body and I am anxiously waiting for the specs on the 5DIV to see if it is what I'm looking for; if it isn't then I'm hoping to grab another 5DIII at a reduced price if I can before they disappear.
"Don't compartmentalize shooters... This cameras not for videographers". Haha
Great points at the start - systems engineering, what is the problem to be solved. Not just trying to fit square pegs in round holes. My technical question - are DSLRs now just paving a cow path. All the engineering that needs to go into reducing mirror vibration. As well as the manufacturing effort. Why not just get rid of the mirror and go mirrorless with in camera image stabilization? Plus it makes video easier - how to get a display image when the mirror is up. Since I often shoot flowers and insects a tilt view finder means I don't have to bend, stoop, or get down then up, as much.
I would love the extra resolution but as a jewelry/macro shooter, it will be of little use to me. With 50MP on a 35mm sensor, the system will be diffraction limited at f/8.
As a student filmmaker, sometimes I feel alone when reading articles & watching videos on DSLR's because they're made to address photographers (obvious & understandable). Right now I'm planning to purchase a DSLR & with my experience using the 5D M3 it's pretty much at the top of my list. What I'd like to know however, is now that the 5DS & 5DR have been announced, does this push back the possibility of a 5D M4 coming out soon? The reason I am holding out and waiting for a Mark IV announcement is because I will be graduating soon so I need to invest in a camera that will stay with me for a while. 4K and other video features are important to me, which is another reason why I'd rather wait for the Mark IV, which is why the 5DS &R do not interest me, and I would hate to purchase a Mark III if it will be getting replaced soon. So I really just want to get your opinion on when you think a Mark IV could make its way to the market. I know you don't discuss rumors but I'd like to see what you or anyone else thinks about it.
I think the best *value* currently on the market is the D750 now that the "Body-induced-glare" issue has been rectified, especially for a first time full frame camera.
Something that you sort of touched on just at the end I think is more significant then most people seem to be thinking. I think these two cameras are very much intended to eat away at Mamyia, Leaf, Pentax, and Hasselblad's medium format digital customer base for commercial studio work. I mean Canon and Apple have the consumer market pretty much saturated and the high end DSLR camera market is mostly Canon vs Nikon still. But these two cameras will really put a bullseye on Pentax/Ricoh in particular and their Pentax 645 at the entry level end of medium format. And that makes a certain amount of sense that they would gun for Ricoh since Ricoh pretty much got back into the camera biz with the intention of going after Canon.
People forget that shooting at higher res and scaling the image down will always give you a sharper image than shooting in the lower resolution in the first place, due to a lower-res sensor.
I would really be interested in a review of how the two are handling the in-camera processing, when shooting RAW-S and RAW-M.
For the sake of an example, let's just say RAW-S is 22.3MP, so I would love to see if the image quality of this internally downscaled image is sharper than the one of the 5DIII, with the native 22.3MP sensor.
Shooting RAW-S/M would be the most convenient way to get around dealing with the large file sizes in post-processing, but still benefit (if so) from the larger sensor.
If you downscale in post using Photoshop or Lightroom you will for sure get a sharper image, but one would have to deal with 70-90MB files.
Maybe this shift to high-MP will even create a new market of "RAW pre-processors", which focus on high-quality RAW down-scaling during import?
Been shooting Canon since 1976. This release is the one that pushed me over the edge. They do this every year. No more. Hello, Metabones.
Finally Canon does something. Obviously this is the way forward, but according to DXO the dynamic range is unimproved from the 5DM3, which isn't the end of the world, but is disappointing nonetheless. So for the next few months, Canon is the resolution king, until Sony's rumored A9 or A99ii comes out, hopefully with better dynamic range. Since the Nikon D810 is at the top of its cycle, we may have to wait a year or so for an offering with this kind of resolution from them.
Something I've found shooting my 645Z is that a lot of care needs to be taken at higher MP's. Something that isn't necessarily the way a DSLR will be used. Potential for disappointment.
I didn't expect the medium format comparison from you as it is Matt Granger. That's apples and oranges. Having a sensor that's almost double in size is just the start. Not to mention 16 bit files. That's 65,536 levels per channel compared to 16,384 in 14 bit files. Also, Leaf shutter lenses alone are one of the biggest reasons to shoot MF. It's really not about the megapixels, though they are nice. Agree with everything else you said though. Thanks for all the great content!
What I think is pointless is having two 50mp cameras with one being sharper. If you're buying a 50mp camera why would you then choose the less sharp one!
Jason Nolan The only reasonable point is for Canon to decide what type of sensor tey'll put in 5Dmk4. But it's still pointless :D
Maybe for who cares about moire, i dont know.
I know this is completely random but Jason Nolan Do you remember what video it was that people were arguing on about replacing the front glass on phones using Loca (uv) glue? I was supposed to send pictures but never got around to it and now I can't remember what video that was on. I know how random this is considering that was quite some time ago.
x9x9x9x9x9 I think it was a tested video from what I can remember.
Jason Nolan Oh alright thank you. I'm going to do some scrolling through comments then since I finally have some damn pictures lol.
I bought my wife the Canon 5D S R. Trying to see how much this could be an alternate run and gun camera to my heavy Hasselblad H4D-60. Using the canon 100 mm lens I can easily say that is is not a medium format killer. I plan to rent the Zeiss Otus 85mm and do more thorough testing. I suspect that I will get outstanding results, just like when I tested my friends Nikon 810 A with the Otus. But then again it was not a medium format killer. Mostly because medium format produces 4 times more color than the 14 bits color 35 mm. Plus a few stops more dynamic range. (And if using the Adobe Camera RAW sharpening tool correctly the Hassy lenses are still a tiny bit sharper than the Otus, but I'm truly splitting hairs here) (Also wish you would cover the Camera RAW Sharping tool in one of your Videos, to demystify how famous photographers like Peter Lik and the like get such detailed images. (hint go on the Adobe forums))
Great video! At the core of the issue of actual sensor size, there really isn't a difference between this model and the 5DMK3, the Nikon D610 or D810. There is however an actual size difference between the 5DS sensor and the Pentax 645Z, Hasselblad H5D-200C, Phase One digital backs etc. What this means is the pixels are being interpolated. Nonetheless, A 14mp or 16mp is all I would really need for just about anything. I think in terms of printing and I can make a 40"x60" print without breaking a sweat. At that size, you are standing a distance away from the print anyways and the better cameras capture more colors than people can differentiate, let alone print. The only real thing that matters to a guy like me anymore is how well it works in low light, not how many pixels the thing has. Even then, most of the time, it doesn't matter because I don't exclusively shoot at concerts.
It's just a few months till 2020, and we still have not seen a 100MP consumer camera with 1million ISO. What happened Matt?
Everything is unnecessary. My first DLSR was Canon 20D. Just 8MP, APSc, just 9AF points etc. And you know what? With that camera I took some of the photos I still love, I got amazing prints of photos taken with that and I started earning money with that camera (and 18-55mm kit lens). I upgraded because I needed sensor cleaning function of newer bodies and because I needed more resolution. Fast forward to 2015 and it's the year when the next upgrade is scheduled. I was on the fence whether I should stay with APSc size sensor and get 7D2 or go full frame with 5D3. Or make a switch to Nikon, because more resolution means more business options for me. I don't need high ISO capabilities, I don't need fast frame rate and I'm not concerned about AF performance (as in anything currently available on the market will do) or video capabilities (again, anything shooting video in full HD is enough at the moment and I will get another body for that). So, however 5Ds and 5DsR is more expensive than 5D3, it's not a price gap that would bother me much. I'll tighten the screws elsewhere. Based on the specs, they sold one 5DsR to me and made my life easier. Now just waiting to see first reviews of the retail version to make sure it doesn't have any unexpected issues.
Great video, Matt!! Nice to see a sensible and unbiased "professional" opinion of these new cameras. You know people so well LOL.
I hope you are recovering well from your operation and I look forward to seeing more of your great videos in a few months time. :-)
I didn't realize how much detail I was losing with the 21MP 5D2 until I used the 5DSR and did a couple of comparison tests with the same lens on both cameras. I had thought the 5D2 was outstanding, and I guess for its time, it was. Only drawback to the 5DSR is that you will learn what lenses are not so good. Also, you may learn more about camera shake--presumably why the 5DSR has an option for a 1/8 second shutter delay for the mirror slap to settle down.
I love your comment. I'm still using my 5d mark 2 which I love. I preordered a 5d mark 4 but im leaning towards cancelling and grabbing the 5ds R.
I opted for a 5DSR over the new IV ONLY because of an incredible price. At 30MP the IV is no slouch. Better video, AF plus the GPS and WiFi built in. I thought the latter were important to me until I had it, and found I rarely used it. Since this is primarily a photography camera, and the AF system is plenty good I went for it. Even though the ISO performance is mediocre, once you reduce it to the size of a normal 20+ megapixel image the noise is pretty much gone. Still love my 6D for low light shooting and portability.
I'm sure you're right that the MP race will keep going, but also hopefully we get more smart manufacturers making 12/16 mp cameras so the ISO quality can go up for those who want it too.
I would have no idea what to do with 50mpx (except maybe wasting a lot of storage space). My cam has 16mpx and I feel that's more than enogh. Even for printing and even after cropping.
Good video Matt Granger. It will be most interesting to see how the current lenses perform, since they certainly aren't updated as often as camera bodies. Are we entering a period where lenses start playing catch-up? I'm guessing we are. Thanks for your great channel!
I don't get the mp resolv of lenses. If I multiply a 16mp M43 sensor x4 you got a 64mp sensor around the size of fullframe. And nobody's talks about the mp resolv. Same story with 24mp crop cameras. Can some one explains this?
Lenses are built with some sensor (film) grain in mind.
The problem here is not if lenses generally can resolve 50 MPx, because they can (medium format).
The problem is: how many lenses good enough for this sensor we have today. And the answer is: possibly not many.
Anyway, it is obvious that sensor resolution will upgrade much quicker than lenses. We will have to get used to the fact that sharpness will get worse (but because of huge resolution we'll still get more details).
The Aps sensor cover the center of the image... all the quality and resoluction is concentrated on there.
Very good video Matt. Saw this video quite late unfortunately, but was informative including the history of megapixel count how with the time things change including the mentality towards them. Get well soon Matt.
I think its awesome but not a super amazing feat of technology.. If you look at a crop sensor mp count or a m4/3 than the density of 50mp is really not so special to the size of a full frame....You nailed it with the lens problem...This camera is for who ever wants it...love how all those haters talking so much about this camera and they haven't even touched it... can't wait for your review when you get one....
Hi Matt. What do you think about this prognostication? Once cameras are able to natively produce 24x36" images (which I think, is the largest standard print size) we will find a distinct cutoff, between consumer and professional bodies. I think larger megapixel cameras will be relegated, for the most part, to those which make use of them. Practically speaking, even if cameras resolution improves indefinitely, the display medium will be the bottleneck. And there will come a point when we could produce wall-mural sized images right out of the camera. But will that mean people will make use of it? Not sure. Perhaps, by then, interior walls will be lined with LCD tech, and will be able to take advantage of it. But I don't think display technology is in the same growth trajectory as image creation. I think the more important question to ask is, when are we going to hit the practical limit of photo-site density; where no amount of software hocus-pocos will correct for the signal to noise ratio. And when will chip fabrication costs come down enough, where medium and large format sensors will be accessible to meer mortals. I think this is analogous to the lossy compression of the MP3 algorithm. It was created as an ad-hoc fix to insufficient and premium cost of storage capacities. I've noticed that hi fidelity audio is beginning to come back. These two or so decades have made a number of technological compromises, because the various spheres of manufacture and design, did not evolve at the same pace. Perhaps the nearing of the hypothetical limit of transistor density has allowed other spheres of the industry to catch up. Just my two cents. 😃
You can get rid of the flicker in the 24p mode if your shutter speed is below 60 in a 60HZ. You don't need technology or computing speed to get rid of that.
There's an error on the 5Ds and 5Dsr when shooting in Live View and in MF mode whilst using the magnification frame. The metering system doesn't follow the magnification frame... The metering system is stuck to the centre of the LCD. Oddly it works fine whilst in AF mode but as a landscape photographer i don't use AF mode... There's no problem with the mark 2 and 3 regarding this issue!
It's also interesting that this essentially means double the pixels in each direction that a 12MP body has. 2x2x12 = 48MP.
To anybody who buys this, have fun with noise at higher ISOs. If the Sony a7s can get crazy high ISOs with 12 mp, that means more mp equals more noise. Then we get to this high of a resolution and noise goes wild, right?
I was once told that I had wasted my money when I installed a one gigabyte hard drive ("you'll never fill that up") six months later windows 98 was released and filled my hard drive on its own.
So When I bought my 36 megapixel D800 I knew that within a few years it would look primitive.
Finally a reviewer who set "critics" straight... Well said! Im definitely getting the 5DS
November, 2020, just picked up the R version from B&H on close out for $1,500.
I perfectly understand there are people that may need 50Mpix cameras and that it's a necessary way forward, but from a personal point of view, my storage space really suffered once I went from an 8Mpix Canon to a newer 18Mpix. Can't imagine how I would manage with a camera where one shot is around 100MB of data. Especially since the long-term data archiving options are so terribly limited today, there's basically no sensible long-term, high-capacity storage media available.
Then again, it's not like I'm going to get such camera any time soon, even going full-frame is still pretty far out of my reach, so it shouldn't really concern me all that much.
I'm just an "armchair commentor" but I have a degree in business management so here goes: Technological development is not a one-way street. You don't improve technology only because you need it improved. Sometimes it's the other way round. Sometimes you do the innovation just for innovation's sake (also called science) and the practical uses therein are discovered later on by you or by others. When the first T model by Ford was released, many a coach rider and horse owner said the very same thing: "it's ridiculous, we don't need it". Resistance is a very human response to development but we all arrive at the same point in the end; some go there eagerly, others kicking and screaming. So, do yourself a favor; stop whining and embrace innovation even if you don't need it. Smile and keep using your D3300 if you will. Just don't rant about people who are excited for a 50mpx sensor. That'd be more ridiculous than anything else.
I like the Canon 5Ds and hope to get my grubby hands on that camera.
I love my 5D mark iii and I will probably stick to it for a while. I see a lot of problems in my shootingstyle with these new bodies. They're also quite slow. For now I'd say 50mp is over-over-overkill. But you are right Matt, maybe in 10 years we buy a snapshot camera with 50mp and our DSLR's (if not fully replaced by mirrorless) will have 100mp by then. Don't underestimate the power of the 5D mark iii guys, especially with 3rd party firmware of Magic Lantern. Besides, I could spend 3500 euros or dollars on such a lot of other stuff...
With the new Canon lineup revealed, I'm actually more interested in what they have done on the other end of the market. I currently have a 600D (looking to upgrade to a 6D soon) but the specs on the 750 and 760D are actually looking good for that end of the market. As i said I'm not in the market at that end but if was, the 760D would be a game changer for me.
What are your thoughts?
Wow, I never really thought about the lenses being able to keep up with the resolution. Interesting. I love it when the technology gets moved forward. I really enjoyed your insight. Subscribed.
I own 2 5D Mark lll cameras and I was glad to see Canon coming out with new product. For my purposes this camera is not for me. My friend who shoots only food advertising s buying one when they hit the stores. I will wait or the 5D mark 4. I would like to see 4K, 36 megapixels, silent shutter, better auto focusing and less noise at higher ISO. If I see that with the Mark 4 I will change out my cameras.
I think the 5DR or whatever it's called is a decent camera, again it depends on what you shoot and for people looking to get into full frame they might as well buy the newest offering since the 5Dmark3 is already 3 years old. As for upgrading I think most people with a 1Dx or 5dmark3 or 6D will stay with their cameras unless they have spare cash laying around. AS for the wide angle zoom lens it's incredibly expensive at $3000, only the most seasoned pros that absolutely need it will buy it, I think the lens will go down to $2500 or lens within one year or by spring next year.
Doesn't suit my needs as a wedding tog. Not really keen on a) switching full cards at crucial moments or b) buying expensive, large cards. This would be great for pros who need to blow up big and macro shooters who crop hard. Sticking to my 5d3, and will be for some time.
oh,nooo! Not again!! Matt, what are you doing! Same as CameraStoreTV, the Otus lens! they are so crying expensive that I could cry! (& thanks for the sensible review!)
50 MP is handy for people who want to crop a lot in post. But for computer and internet 8MP is more then enough i think. You dont want to wait half an hour before your page is loaded because of 1 gig on pictures that must be uploaded. I think it all depends on where you want to use it for. For just your computer screen and internet, 8MP is more the enough, for big banners and advertisement you do need 50 or 80MP. So look first to the exposing medium you use before you waist your money. If your exposing medium is 1600 x 900 pixels = 1.5 MP, then 8 MP is already an overkill and the picture needs to be downgraded a lot....but that is when you crop before you shoot and not visa versa.
awesome review. I couldn't agree more. I mainly shoot weddings so I have a 6D. Awesome low light camera. However I do also shoot sports. Apparently a terrible camera for sports....ha.
Well I shoot 1 frame at a time, even for sports. It does ok for me.
So. Do I buy the canon 5d mark 3, 5ds, or wait for the mark 4. I'm just a amateur but want to learn as much as I possibly can and maybe make a career out of this. I have the money to invest in equipment. I'm planning on getting a 100-400 ii lens, a wide angle lens, and a 100mm macro lens. My main interests are sport and wildlife, along with landscapes and events. It would be nice to have the camera for this summer but not a must. What would you guys suggest.
Thanks
Chris
P.S. I would like to make large prints of my work if possible, higher megapixels would be better, but do you think it's necessary.
I get 150MP ( 880 MB ) from 98 LP/mm Scans from my Mamiya RB67 Professional SD's 6x8 negatives
For me, the biggest problem with these megapixel monsters are the lenses. I own a D800, and only the Sigma Art 50mm F1.4 (from my lens kit) does some justice to the sensor. And to be honest - I just don't have that much money, to buy Zeiss lenses :)
Mostly, I shoot landscape with my 6D and a TS lens. I value my WiFi and GPS. I would like more pixels, but dynamic range is my biggest concern, I often shoot into the sun.
I can wait a bit longer, maybe for a 6Dii. Or maybe there is a Sony in my future.
I find Olympus’ approach to a higher resolution much more interesting and quite clever. But it doesn’t work with moving objects.
The title put me off.......but great vid Matt. Agreed with all your points!
50mp on such a small die concerns me that way too much is being done in software/firmware. Even if there is four cores working, they will be working for the wrong reason... and I suspect that will show. Though more expensive, the Pentax 645z interests me more for the photo-site size is appropriate for current tech, and the lenses resolve to the pixel count of the camera's sensor. Canon, in my opinion, should have went with a larger die size and entered the medium format arena sincerely, not half-assed.
why always the question if there are lenses out there which have the required resolution? The answer is easy - all EF L-lenses which work on a 7D APS-C will work on the 5Ds - the pixel size of the 5Ds is almost the same as the 7D therefore they will work. Interesting aspect is how much will be the effective pixel count. If you check the DSO sharpness results then all prime lenses used on Bayer* sensors (Canon, Nikon...) behave very similar. The effective resolution is at approximately 70-80% of the physical pixel count
* see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayer_filter
He said crop sensor lenses fit on full sensor cameras. Not true. Not for Canon. And while it works for Nikon, you'll get the edges cut off in your image when using some of your more wide angle lenses.
Just because it has 50 megapixels like some medium format cameras doesn't mean it will have the same image quality.
I find it annoying when people compare full frame (36x24mm) to medium format (44x33mm, 37x49mm and 40x53mm)
Well you said "love to hear". Any aperture setting smaller than 5.6 is going to have an airy disk that's larger than the pixels. So if you're going to shoot landscape, you're wasting this camera if you shoot any smaller apertures than 5.6. On the other hand almost all subjects are 3 dimensional. So for almost all subjects you need f/8 or smaller. Ok, so you can't see the benefit of 50 MP with anything smaller than 5.6 and you can't photograph 3D objects with anything larger than f/8. It looks like it's going to be a great camera for shooting brick walls. I'm sure they'll sell boat loads of them to landscape photographers who all shoot at f/22 and rave about how much detail they can get.
I really like the Canon EOS 5Ds for it's 50.6 megapixel, full-fame CMOS sensor.
My friend shoots with a Nikon 810. I told him he could get better results by shooting in RAW or TIFF and learn to do some PP. He tells me that he tried shooting RAW and that the pic was 70mbs and that when he took a few shots in TIFF they were 100mbs. I wonder what size the RAW files on this monster would be.
No 100MP cameras in the consumer market yet.
Cameras will evolve no matter what we say, my problem with camera manufacturers is that they think first with they're feet and afterwards they try to compensate. Take a look at Nikon for example, D800 was awful as a high MPX camera! it was a good camera but in terms of MPX, it should have remained at 26. No need for 36mpx because of it's structure, not many lenses could manage those 36mpx. D810 on the other hand.....when i game out it simply kicked D800 and D800E in the rear. D810 is a 10+ grade camera, it's low AA filter pass makes the lenses handle that sensor with ease.
I tried Sony A7r.....got back to Nikon. I hope that Canon learned something from these two manufacturers. And btw.....why do you people need 26mpx,36mpx,100mpx when you don't do prints? uploading a image on the internet from a 36mpx camera will impress no one!!! I bought D800 because i do prints and it's the only reason! when i upload something on the internet, i downsize it at 25% and that makes those 36mpx useless!