canon rumors FORUM

Rumors => EOS Bodies => Topic started by: brianftpc on November 16, 2017, 06:07:39 AM

Title: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: brianftpc on November 16, 2017, 06:07:39 AM
If only there were a leak to give me a reason not to buy the a7Riii
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: jolyonralph on November 16, 2017, 06:31:21 AM
The 5DSr is a great example of a camera that may not be the best (except for resolution) featurewise on paper, but consistently turns out stunningly good results in use.

It's a solid workhorse, and I have no doubt that the updated version will be even better, but more importantly, dependable.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: neuroanatomist on November 16, 2017, 06:40:42 AM
The 5DsR II will be an excellent camera that improves incrementally on the current version in several ways. 

Given the bias evident in your poll choices, you should just buy the a7RIII now. 
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: brianftpc on November 16, 2017, 07:06:35 AM
I own a 1Dx, 1Dx mk2 and 5DsR...theres no bias...its honesty. Canon cant help itself from protecting the cinema line to make the camera that needs to be made. Also hows it gonna handicap the 5DsR mk2 to protect the 5D mk4. We all know the 5DsR wont be 4k60p...but it should be and not at 800mbps. Will it have 4k hdmi out...probably not. Now I cant do 4k live streams. I dont want to switch. I hate the way the a9 feels in my hands and ive shot over 7,000 pics with it. I want DPAF but whats the point if I need to spend over 1,000 per hour of CFast2 4k60p. Im willing to live with GOOD ENOUGH video AF sony has now.

Id pay 6,000 for a 5DsR mk2 with low light equal to the a7r iii, 4k 60p, IBIS, 4k hdmi out, 8-10 fps, 50 RAW frame buffer uncompressed, DPAF, wifi. Thats all very realistic. If I saw a leak that it was coming out next summer Id wait for it unless the A7Siii pulled me away from the C200.

I want canon to do better. Im not gonna make excuses for it to keep being less than it should be.

Oh and my 5DsR is USELESS for profesisonal video. thats really the biggest thing pushing me away from it. Hell a canon xf400 has DPAF and 4k60P out.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Memdroid on November 16, 2017, 07:22:02 AM
5DS series was never advertised as a dedicated or capable video camera, but rather a big megapixel monster for still images. Still is actually and the successor probably will continue that trend.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: privatebydesign on November 16, 2017, 07:34:17 AM
Canon specifically made and marketed the 5DSR to people interested in very high resolution stills imagery, and whist I didn't get one I applaud them for making such a dedicated camera that still hasn't been out resolved. To moan about it's lack of video functions is utterly ridiculous, features that didn't make sense on the design brief were specifically taken away from the 5D MkIII body to make way for more relevant high resolution stills functionality.

I will be getting a 5DSR MkII if it has on chip ADC or similar performance and I'll get one if it doesn't do video at all, because I'd be buying it as a high resolution stills camera.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: neuroanatomist on November 16, 2017, 07:40:32 AM
I own a 1Dx, 1Dx mk2 and 5DsR...theres no bias...its honesty.

Right.  It's DoA or blows away the competition, neither of which is at all likely.  Or it's mirrorless, which hopefully you know is completely unrealistic.   The most logical option, equivalent to the competition, you describe as too little too late (because no one cares about things like reliability and lens selection, right?). Sure, no bias there…   ::)


I'd pay 6,000 for a 5DsR mk2 with low light equal to the a7r iii, 4k 60p, IBIS, 4k hdmi out, 8-10 fps, 50 RAW frame buffer uncompressed, DPAF, wifi. Thats all very realistic.

Yes, IBIS is very realistic in a Canon body, and the high-resolution full frame camera is the most logical place for them to introduce it. 

Dude, just buy the Sony, or else you'll never be happy!
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Mikehit on November 16, 2017, 08:30:42 AM
I own a 1Dx, 1Dx mk2 and 5DsR...theres no bias...its honesty. Canon cant help itself from protecting the cinema line to make the camera that needs to be made. Also hows it gonna handicap the 5DsR mk2 to protect the 5D mk4. We all know the 5DsR wont be 4k60p...but it should be and not at 800mbps. Will it have 4k hdmi out...probably not. Now I cant do 4k live streams. I dont want to switch. I hate the way the a9 feels in my hands and ive shot over 7,000 pics with it. I want DPAF but whats the point if I need to spend over 1,000 per hour of CFast2 4k60p. Im willing to live with GOOD ENOUGH video AF sony has now.

Id pay 6,000 for a 5DsR mk2 with low light equal to the a7r iii, 4k 60p, IBIS, 4k hdmi out, 8-10 fps, 50 RAW frame buffer uncompressed, DPAF, wifi. Thats all very realistic. If I saw a leak that it was coming out next summer Id wait for it unless the A7Siii pulled me away from the C200.

I want canon to do better. Im not gonna make excuses for it to keep being less than it should be.

Oh and my 5DsR is USELESS for profesisonal video. thats really the biggest thing pushing me away from it. Hell a canon xf400 has DPAF and 4k60P out.

The fact you have Canon does not mean the poll is not biased. The blend of questions is biased, the reason you set up the poll is biased towards a weak point of Canon (video).
I presume you will not be applying for a job at Gallup any time soon.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: AlanF on November 16, 2017, 09:21:46 AM
If only there were a leak to give me a reason not to buy the a7Riii

What a ridiculous poll. Three negative choices, one pretty irrelevant and the only positive choice so distorted in unlikely features that it is difficult to expect them and check that box.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Hector1970 on November 16, 2017, 09:24:24 AM
The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.
You know the file size when you are buying it but 50mp tends to be a waste.
I think they crammed too many MP's in the sensor to get to fifty and overstretched it.
I've felt the same with the 7DII (similar if not same MP density).
It wasn't a great buy.
It is slow, there is a second or two delay between taking the photo and it displaying which I find annoying.
It performs best on a tripod at ISO100.
If they bring out a 5DSR Mark II it would need to be really excellent to convince me to upgrade.
The detail it would bring out would have to be a step above the 5D IV.
It's performance at ISO 1600 onwards would need to be alot better

Of course it could be mirrorless which would be a different take.
I think if Canon go mirrorless the first camera has to be very good.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: AlanF on November 16, 2017, 10:51:25 AM
The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.


There is something wrong with your 5DSR. The linear resolution of mine at iso640 is 30-40% higher in terms of lp/mm for all my lenses using charts and distinctly sharper for reproducing images than my 5DIV, and 50% more than my previous 5DIII.
I don't think my findings are unique. Lensrentals measured MTFs from the 5DS, 5DSR and 5DIII back in 2015 and showed up to a 50% increase in the centre for a sharp lens on the 5DSR vs 5DIII https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests/
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: jolyonralph on November 16, 2017, 11:13:41 AM
The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.

What lenses, what setup? The difference between 5DSR and 5D III is night and day - with the right lenses.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: unfocused on November 16, 2017, 11:43:08 AM
If only there were a leak to give me a reason not to buy the a7Riii

What a ridiculous poll. Three negative choices, one pretty irrelevant and the only positive choice so distorted in unlikely features that it is difficult to expect them and check that box.

Total waste of valuable internet space.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: JoSto on November 16, 2017, 12:02:58 PM
Such a nonsense. But I have to congratulate the marketing departments of the camera companies. They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough. Youtube also has a significant share in this stupidity.

If you know what you are doing there is zero possibility that there is a picture you cant take because you have "just" a 5dmk4 or a 1DXmk2. I still have a original 1DX and all my big prints look amazing. Just 18 MPix. More than enough.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Frodo on November 16, 2017, 01:02:06 PM
My first reaction was that this thread is not worth a reply, but it annoyed me enough that I will.
I just bought a 5DsR. A week ago. I bought it for landscape and wedding photography. It noticeably outresolves my 6D from my sharp 35/2IS to my less sharp 24-105/5IS, much as Roger reported. I love the tonality and I enjoy working with the camera - I've owned several Canon dslrs since the 300D including the 5D and 5DII, so I felt right at home.
Do I need 50MP? Mostly no. But its like having a 50-100mm zoom that I shoot mostly at 50mm. I print moderately large landscapes and its nice to have the resolution when I need it. Very few of my prints would benefit from an extra stop in the shadows.
Do I shoot video? Rarely. Criticising the 5DsR for not shooting video is like criticising my Italian V-twin motorcycle for being poor off-road.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: 9VIII on November 16, 2017, 01:28:34 PM
Canon already out-sells every competitor and their market share is growing.

The 5DS MkII will be one of the best cameras ever made (while at the same time having less than 14 stops of DR and a moderate burst rate, because the ecosystem as a whole is more important than any one feature).
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: jolyonralph on November 16, 2017, 01:52:40 PM
> The 5DS MkII will be one of the best cameras ever made

From what I heard there won't be a 5DS mark II, only 5DSR mark II.

One of the compromises of the 5DSR design was that it needed to keep the low pass filter and have an additional 'antifilter' put to cancel this out in order for the design to have commonality with the 5DS.

In order to remove this compromise in the 5DSR II there won't be an option for low pass filter at all.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: 9VIII on November 16, 2017, 02:55:23 PM
> The 5DS MkII will be one of the best cameras ever made

From what I heard there won't be a 5DS mark II, only 5DSR mark II.

One of the compromises of the 5DSR design was that it needed to keep the low pass filter and have an additional 'antifilter' put to cancel this out in order for the design to have commonality with the 5DS.

In order to remove this compromise in the 5DSR II there won't be an option for low pass filter at all.

The "5DSR" name exists to separate it from the "5DS", but when there is no "S" model there is no reason to use the "SR" designation.
It will just be called the "5DS MkII", kind of like how there was no "Nikon D810E" even though the D810 follows the D800E configuration.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: bhf3737 on November 16, 2017, 04:08:09 PM
I own a 1Dx, 1Dx mk2 and 5DsR...theres no bias...its honesty. Canon cant help itself from protecting the cinema line to make the camera that needs to be made. Also hows it gonna handicap the 5DsR mk2 to protect the 5D mk4. We all know the 5DsR wont be 4k60p...but it should be and not at 800mbps. Will it have 4k hdmi out...probably not. Now I cant do 4k live streams. I dont want to switch. I hate the way the a9 feels in my hands and ive shot over 7,000 pics with it. I want DPAF but whats the point if I need to spend over 1,000 per hour of CFast2 4k60p. Im willing to live with GOOD ENOUGH video AF sony has now.

Id pay 6,000 for a 5DsR mk2 with low light equal to the a7r iii, 4k 60p, IBIS, 4k hdmi out, 8-10 fps, 50 RAW frame buffer uncompressed, DPAF, wifi. Thats all very realistic. If I saw a leak that it was coming out next summer Id wait for it unless the A7Siii pulled me away from the C200.

I want canon to do better. Im not gonna make excuses for it to keep being less than it should be.

Oh and my 5DsR is USELESS for professonal video. thats really the biggest thing pushing me away from it. Hell a canon xf400 has DPAF and 4k60P out.

Could you be kind enough to tell me about your workflow of how you live-stream in 4K out of any currently available DSLR or mirrorless camera in a sustainable way (say for a typical 2-hour corporate function) and what is the cost of additional hardware setup you have. If that camera exists I'll definitely buy it in a blink of eye!

You complain about lack of 4K out and 4k60p in a still oriented Canon camera. Please let me know any other brand DSLR or mirrorless camera that can do both (i.e. 4k internal recording and 4k out simultaneously) without crippling either the bit rate (min 150 mbps) or bit depth (4:2:2, 10 bit), and again I will buy that camera in a blink of eye!   
There is an obvious reason that Canon uses over $1,000 per hour CFast2 card to deliver 4k60p contents in a reliable and dependable way. Same does RED and even Sony pro video line. Professional select tools that deliver what promised and matches their needs. 5DSR has been a tool that can deliver excellent hi-res stills and the II version will definitely push the boundary of image quality even further.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: rrcphoto on November 16, 2017, 06:20:34 PM
Hell a canon xf400 has DPAF and 4k60P out.

I'm curious how you'd expect canon to mimic a non-sealed and vented camcorder in a sealed DSLR body?
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Act444 on November 16, 2017, 07:23:44 PM
The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.


Wow...not sure what lens you were using on it but having shot with all three cameras, I can tell you there’s no comparison. The 5DSR is head and shoulders above the other two when it comes to resolving power. If you put a quality lens on the R, preferably an image-stabilized one, it should *not* leave you wanting.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Adelino on November 17, 2017, 01:22:19 AM
Third option but no IBIS.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: James Larsen on November 18, 2017, 09:58:53 AM
It's going to be decent, but too late in the game (as usual).  :-\
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: privatebydesign on November 18, 2017, 02:29:24 PM
It's going to be decent, but too late in the game (as usual).  :-\

Not for me it isn't. I am looking forwards to it and am happy to bide my time until it arrives and gets shaken down.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Isaacheus on November 19, 2017, 01:41:37 AM
Third option but no IBIS.

Does Canon have any patents on ibis or similar tech? A high MP rig would be the logical place to have it
I would be looking at the next 5dsr type body to see if it fits what I'm wanting, I'm pretty sure Canon could put all the pieces together in one rig, just not that confident that they will
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: midluk on November 19, 2017, 04:11:37 AM
Third option but no IBIS.

Does Canon have any patents on ibis or similar tech? A high MP rig would be the logical place to have it
I would be looking at the next 5dsr type body to see if it fits what I'm wanting, I'm pretty sure Canon could put all the pieces together in one rig, just not that confident that they will
I'm sure they have a patent, but IBIS on EF mount will not happen. IBIS moves the sensor outside of the image circle which the mount, lenses and size of mirror box are designed for. Sony didn't care about image degradation at the corners, but Canon is building real professional products where they would not allow such a compromise.
Only chance for IBIS in EF I see would be APC-H (or APS-C without EF-S compatibility).
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: jolyonralph on November 19, 2017, 07:59:56 AM
For high-resolution macro photography the pixel shift feature in the A7RIII is a hugely significant development.

I haven't tried it out yet, but it could be a game changer.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: privatebydesign on November 19, 2017, 08:07:24 AM
For high-resolution macro photography the pixel shift feature in the A7RIII is a hugely significant development.

I haven't tried it out yet, but it could be a game changer.

An improvement with many caveats, maybe.

A game changer, no, not even close. Other manufacturers have been doing it for years to little fanfare, indeed Hasselblad have dropped the feature due to the underwhelming response.

But tell me, what does the 5DSR not do for your high resolution macro photography?
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: danski0224 on November 19, 2017, 08:21:24 AM
When is the rumored MkII coming out?
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: rrcphoto on November 19, 2017, 08:33:08 AM
Third option but no IBIS.

Does Canon have any patents on ibis or similar tech?

None. Notta. Not. One. Single. Patent.


Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: rrcphoto on November 19, 2017, 08:34:00 AM
For high-resolution macro photography the pixel shift feature in the A7RIII is a hugely significant development.

not really. focus shift is far more your friend for high resolution macro, and it's not as if the A7RIII was the first to ever offer pixel shift so it's hardly "a significant development"


Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: neurorx on November 21, 2017, 12:41:01 PM
What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography?  Can you use it hand-held?  Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?   

I got the 5D IV and returned it as it wasn't a big enough jump over my 5D III.  The extra DR was nice, but not enough to make me pay the original 3400.  I wanted to see if the 5Dsr might be an attractive option for the outdoor photos.  I don't use my camera for videos, but really do want higher resolution as I really value details in the photos I take.  My taste, please no stones...
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: scottkinfw on November 21, 2017, 01:22:52 PM
5DS series was never advertised as a dedicated or capable video camera, but rather a big megapixel monster for still images. Still is actually and the successor probably will continue that trend.

These are opinions of what YOU think it should be.  You may not be the majority, or the demographic that actually buys this camera the most!  Canon usually makes evolutionary changes, not revolutionary changes so it would not be reasonable to expect differently about the next release.

I am considering a high res camera, and I would likely be thrilled to have the next iteration.  Video? Not that important to me.

Just another perspective.

sek
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: scottkinfw on November 21, 2017, 01:25:53 PM
I own a 1Dx, 1Dx mk2 and 5DsR...theres no bias...its honesty. Canon cant help itself from protecting the cinema line to make the camera that needs to be made. Also hows it gonna handicap the 5DsR mk2 to protect the 5D mk4. We all know the 5DsR wont be 4k60p...but it should be and not at 800mbps. Will it have 4k hdmi out...probably not. Now I cant do 4k live streams. I dont want to switch. I hate the way the a9 feels in my hands and ive shot over 7,000 pics with it. I want DPAF but whats the point if I need to spend over 1,000 per hour of CFast2 4k60p. Im willing to live with GOOD ENOUGH video AF sony has now.

Id pay 6,000 for a 5DsR mk2 with low light equal to the a7r iii, 4k 60p, IBIS, 4k hdmi out, 8-10 fps, 50 RAW frame buffer uncompressed, DPAF, wifi. Thats all very realistic. If I saw a leak that it was coming out next summer Id wait for it unless the A7Siii pulled me away from the C200.

I want canon to do better. Im not gonna make excuses for it to keep being less than it should be.

Oh and my 5DsR is USELESS for profesisonal video. thats really the biggest thing pushing me away from it. Hell a canon xf400 has DPAF and 4k60P out.

The fact you have Canon does not mean the poll is not biased. The blend of questions is biased, the reason you set up the poll is biased towards a weak point of Canon (video).
I presume you will not be applying for a job at Gallup any time soon.

I agree.  I didn't answer the poll question because there was no realistic answer I could agree with.

Scott
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: edoorn on November 21, 2017, 01:29:50 PM
What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography?  Can you use it hand-held?  Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?   

I got the 5D IV and returned it as it wasn't a big enough jump over my 5D III.  The extra DR was nice, but not enough to make me pay the original 3400.  I wanted to see if the 5Dsr might be an attractive option for the outdoor photos.  I don't use my camera for videos, but really do want higher resolution as I really value details in the photos I take.  My taste, please no stones...

I rented a 5ds for a week of wildlife shooting (mainly big cats) in the Mara last year. Ita not a very fast camera but those pixels, that’s amazing to have.

Hand held can be done but I shot it off a bean bag a lot. Have a large print with cheetah’s now in the living room, taken with 100-400ii and converter and it looks great.

The 5d4 is really a great camera (much more improvements than just the dr) and I hope they will bring the tech from this cam to a 5ds II. Along with a tilt screen and hopefully some other surprises :)
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: scottkinfw on November 21, 2017, 01:30:29 PM
The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.
You know the file size when you are buying it but 50mp tends to be a waste.
I think they crammed too many MP's in the sensor to get to fifty and overstretched it.
I've felt the same with the 7DII (similar if not same MP density).
It wasn't a great buy.
It is slow, there is a second or two delay between taking the photo and it displaying which I find annoying.
It performs best on a tripod at ISO100.
If they bring out a 5DSR Mark II it would need to be really excellent to convince me to upgrade.
The detail it would bring out would have to be a step above the 5D IV.
It's performance at ISO 1600 onwards would need to be alot better

Of course it could be mirrorless which would be a different take.
I think if Canon go mirrorless the first camera has to be very good.

What lenses are you using on the 5Dsr?  That could make a huge difference in image quality.

Scott
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Mikehit on November 21, 2017, 01:37:09 PM
What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography?  Can you use it hand-held?  Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?   

I got the 5D IV and returned it as it wasn't a big enough jump over my 5D III.  The extra DR was nice, but not enough to make me pay the original 3400.  I wanted to see if the 5Dsr might be an attractive option for the outdoor photos.  I don't use my camera for videos, but really do want higher resolution as I really value details in the photos I take.  My taste, please no stones...

Why would you not be able to use it handheld? Or with L glass? Are you referring to comments about is showing flaws in technique?
If so, then understand one thing: even if you had a tera-zillion MP camera, the image quality will never be any more worse or have more flaws than with a 20MP, 50MP or a 100MP sensor (and by flaws I mean camera shake, subject movement, lens aberrations or diffusion). What does happen is that poor technique will inhibit realising the benefits of more pixels - a lot people look at an image 1:1 on the computer and say "this is soft! I need to use a tripod" but that is because at 1:1 you are looking at a larger image.

Yes, the 5DSR will give more detail, but likely at the expense of dynamic range. There is no free lunch. In good light I would say use the 5DSR, in low light the 5DIV starts to pull ahead - you can downsample the 5DSR and get closer to the DR of the 5DIV (or the 5DIII), but it is all compromises.
I find exactly the same thing with my 7D2 compared to 1Dx2, but then I got the 1Dx2 not for IQ but for AF compared to my 7D2 when shooting fast moving wildlife. It sounds like you will not have the same issues as I do.
I would say buy the 5DSR and have fun.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: scottkinfw on November 21, 2017, 02:17:39 PM
What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography?  Can you use it hand-held?  Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?   

I got the 5D IV and returned it as it wasn't a big enough jump over my 5D III.  The extra DR was nice, but not enough to make me pay the original 3400.  I wanted to see if the 5Dsr might be an attractive option for the outdoor photos.  I don't use my camera for videos, but really do want higher resolution as I really value details in the photos I take.  My taste, please no stones...

I'm not expert on the questions, but with that said, the R would not be my first choice for low light, or wildlife that is moving.  Depending on your lens and the lighting, you should be able to hand hold.
Landscape photography typically relies on tripods and filters (though not always), so I would imagine that this is how it would be used for landscape pics.  The high resolution of this sensor screams for the best resolving lenses, so L lenses, especially newer releases would be ideal.  If I misstate anything, I apologize.

Scott
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Larsskv on November 21, 2017, 04:55:20 PM
What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography?  Can you use it hand-held?  Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?   

I got the 5D IV and returned it as it wasn't a big enough jump over my 5D III.  The extra DR was nice, but not enough to make me pay the original 3400.  I wanted to see if the 5Dsr might be an attractive option for the outdoor photos.  I don't use my camera for videos, but really do want higher resolution as I really value details in the photos I take.  My taste, please no stones...

My 5Ds hasn’t been on a tripod more than a couple of times. It is no problem at all to use it handheld. Actually, I use my 5Ds for street photography quite a lot, and it performs very well.

I try to keep my shutter speed about 50% faster than I would do with my 1DXII, and that usually turns out good. If I need to use slower shutter speeds, I take a few extra shots, so that I can have more to choose from, and that will usually give me a good result.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: ahsanford on November 21, 2017, 05:07:56 PM
If only there were a leak to give me a reason not to buy the a7Riii

What a ridiculous poll. Three negative choices, one pretty irrelevant and the only positive choice so distorted in unlikely features that it is difficult to expect them and check that box.

+1. 

I can't find the option for "It will only offer 80% as much as the competition but it will work reliably and seamlessly with my other gear and will sell really well" on this poll.

- A
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Chris_BC on November 21, 2017, 05:13:18 PM
What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography?  Can you use it hand-held?  Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?   

I got the 5D IV and returned it as it wasn't a big enough jump over my 5D III.  The extra DR was nice, but not enough to make me pay the original 3400.  I wanted to see if the 5Dsr might be an attractive option for the outdoor photos.  I don't use my camera for videos, but really do want higher resolution as I really value details in the photos I take.  My taste, please no stones...

I use my 5DsR handheld much of the time.  I also use a tripod at times.  The same rules apply as with other cameras and shooting situations.  The longer the exposure, the more likely you need a tripod.  I use nothing but L glass, and newer versions when I can.  When using IS lenses in bright light in particular, I'm going to say that a better lens is going to be much more important than using a tripod.  Of course this will vary depending on how steady your hands are.

I had the 5D MkIII, and I can assure you that the 5DsR is a big jump in resolution and sharpness.  I know this better than most as my monitor is the 43 inch Philips 4K model.  If you're viewing on something 27 inches or smaller, you just aren't coming close to getting a true idea.  Unless your face is about 10 inches away....  (BTW, viewing at 50% is pretty much the highest you want to go for a true assessment of sharpness.  The rule about sampling rate being double the max you want to observe is still true, so I have no idea why people talk about pixel peeping at 100%.)

Some of my pictures viewed on the Philips literally look as if I'm looking out the window at the scene.  I've always been after maximum sharpness, and the 5DsR delivers in spades.  I was never happy with anything sharpness wise until I had the 5D MkIII, and even then I was hoping for even more.  The 5DsR delivers, and it is excellent for landscapes handheld as long as you have the light.  If you want to kick it up a notch and be able to stop down for greater depth of field as well, use the tripod and the mirror lockup.

As others have noted, the 5DsR is not a great low light camera compared to other recent options out there.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: ahsanford on November 21, 2017, 05:23:46 PM
What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography?  Can you use it hand-held?  Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?   

Just speaking to the lens question, as Uncle Rog shows here...

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests/

...a rising tide lifts all boats, but better boats are lifted higher.  All lenses in his test (3 very good + 1 older/used/banged up) show a greater resolving power on the finer 50 MP canvas, but the quality of the lens dictates how much better it gets.

- A
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Memdroid on November 22, 2017, 03:38:39 AM
5DS series was never advertised as a dedicated or capable video camera, but rather a big megapixel monster for still images. Still is actually and the successor probably will continue that trend.

These are opinions of what YOU think it should be.  You may not be the majority, or the demographic that actually buys this camera the most!  Canon usually makes evolutionary changes, not revolutionary changes so it would not be reasonable to expect differently about the next release.

I am considering a high res camera, and I would likely be thrilled to have the next iteration.  Video? Not that important to me.

Just another perspective.

sek


I think you misquoted or misread my post...
You basically said what I already posted.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: jolyonralph on November 22, 2017, 05:29:03 AM
For high-resolution macro photography the pixel shift feature in the A7RIII is a hugely significant development.

not really. focus shift is far more your friend for high resolution macro, and it's not as if the A7RIII was the first to ever offer pixel shift so it's hardly "a significant development"

Focus shift is a simple but useful way of getting basic macro stacking for larger objects but doesn't work for smaller items where the focus shift is too coarse to be able to capture every layer needed. 

There you need to move the camera (or object) with precise accuracy using something like the Stackshot system.

Now, if you combine this with pixel shift, and take a pixel shift combined image for every single point in your stack you'll take 4 times as many photos but you'll get better results.

Also.  The other huge bonus with mirrorless cameras for this kind of work is being able to take photos with the shutter locked up. When you're doing 200+ shots to create a single image this is quite useful.  Having said that, the Sony implementation so far isn't perfect, and Canon does seem to integrate better into remote control systems for example with support by Helicon Remote.     But the A7RIII does seem like it would be a great camera for this kind of work IF the software support was better.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: suburbia on November 22, 2017, 12:38:58 PM
wonder the comparison with astro-photography

The new Sony a7RIII camera still eats stars

Read more: https://photorumors.com/2017/11/22/the-new-sony-a7riii-camera-still-eats-stars/#ixzz4zBQNRtOR
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: scyrene on November 22, 2017, 01:04:08 PM
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.

You may not think it does, but it does.

What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography?  Can you use it hand-held?  Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?   

I have found the 5Ds essentially the same as the 5D3 in terms of what it can do (the slightly lower fps has never been an issue for *me*, although it's not ideal for BIF) - by which I mean it is not worse in any noticeable regard. It does require much more hard disk space, however. You can use it handheld, although for best pixel-level sharpness you need rather faster shutter speeds for the same conditions - it's not prohibitive by any means though. I have no complaints regarding image quality.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: tron on November 22, 2017, 01:31:43 PM
If only there were a leak to give me a reason not to buy the a7Riii

What a ridiculous poll. Three negative choices, one pretty irrelevant and the only positive choice so distorted in unlikely features that it is difficult to expect them and check that box.
+1000  Not a reasonable choice like what Neuro said: incremental update to a functional camera. And since the current camera is a very good camera I can only be sure what its successor will be.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Talys on November 22, 2017, 01:34:01 PM
It's threads like this that make me wish this forum had a downvote/vote to hide feature, because the poll options are ridiculous and make assumptions, like:

1) The poll voter cares about 4k video, or video at all
2) The person thinks that A7RIII is a usable camera
3) The reader believes that the D850's sensor sophistication outweighs other Nikon system disadvantages

How about option #6 and #7?

[ ] "I have no idea what the 5DsR Mk2's features will be, and although I like reading about these things, I'm unlikely to buy a camera at this price point made by any manufacturer."

[ ] "I have no idea what the 5DSR Mk2's features will be, but I'm excited about a refreshed high-resolution Canon body and will seriously consider it as the specifics become published."

Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: tron on November 22, 2017, 03:04:17 PM
We basically need another option:  "This is a stupid poll"  ;D
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: ahsanford on November 22, 2017, 03:40:45 PM
Personally, I think the 5DS/R2 as a product asks a fundamental question of Canon:  should they double down on detail or step towards more general purpose applications.  They could go all in on resolution or they could walk towards the 'supercamera' concept of high res *and* higher fps, like the A7R3 and D850 have recently done.

Crudely:  they could go 80 MP x 5 fps or they could go 50 MP x 8 fps.  (Don't torture the numbers, I'm just painting a picture.)  The former is 5D4 complimentary, while the latter could lower 5D4 sales unless a much higher price point is established.

Whichever way they go on the 5DS/R2, I'm presuming either model will have all the 5D4 improvements -- on-chip ADC, touch, DPAF, DPRAW, WiFi, NFC, etc.

But I'm not positive it will get a tilty-flippy.  I presume the 5D5 will finally get one, but perhaps the 5DS/R2 has had shared 5D4 frame / component assumptions baked into its business plan for some time.

- A
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: unfocused on November 22, 2017, 05:00:07 PM
Personally, I think the 5DS/R2 as a product asks a fundamental question of Canon:  should they double down on detail or step towards more general purpose applications.  They could go all in on resolution or they could walk towards the 'supercamera' concept of high res *and* higher fps, like the A7R3 and D850 have recently done.

Crudely:  they could go 80 MP x 5 fps or they could go 50 MP x 8 fps.  (Don't torture the numbers, I'm just painting a picture.)  The former is 5D4 complimentary, while the latter could lower 5D4 sales unless a much higher price point is established.

Whichever way they go on the 5DS/R2, I'm presuming either model will have all the 5D4 improvements -- on-chip ADC, touch, DPAF, DPRAW, WiFi, NFC, etc.

But I'm not positive it will get a tilty-flippy.  I presume the 5D5 will finally get one, but perhaps the 5DS/R2 has had shared 5D4 frame / component assumptions baked into its business plan for some time.

- A

Sorry, but I don't see the 5Ds series asking or answering any fundamental questions. The 5Ds series was created as a niche camera focused on the highest reasonable resolution at the time. Canon saw a market and filled it.

To make it affordable, Canon created a Franken-camera using the 5DIII body and an apparently upscaled 70D sensor.

I don't see the basic formula changing. 5DIV body with a sensor likely comparable to an upscaled 7DIII sensor -- which I expect will be different and better than the 80D, but will likely have a marginal increase in megapixel count.

If their market research shows that customers want to drop the AA filter (highly likely in my opinion) they may release just one version.

Frame rate will be driven by the limits of the electronics-- it's at most a secondary consideration and not a driver of specs or purchases. Those who want a higher frame rate have plenty of other choices.

In short, the 5Ds II will be a very solid upgrade with (as you said) "on-chip ADC, touch, DPAF, DPRAW, WiFi, NFC, etc." But, as far as answering any fundamental questions about the future emphasis of Canon's R&D, this is not the camera you are looking for.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: ahsanford on November 22, 2017, 05:04:32 PM
I don't see the basic formula changing. 5DIV body with a sensor likely comparable to an upscaled 7DIII sensor -- which I expect will be different and better than the 80D, but will likely have a marginal increase in megapixel count.

If their market research shows that customers want to drop the AA filter (highly likely in my opinion) they may release just one version.

Frame rate will be driven by the limits of the electronics-- it's at most a secondary consideration and not a driver of specs or purchases. Those who want a higher frame rate have plenty of other choices.

In short, the 5Ds II will be a very solid upgrade with (as you said) "on-chip ADC, touch, DPAF, DPRAW, WiFi, NFC, etc." But, as far as answering any fundamental questions about the future emphasis of Canon's R&D, this is not the camera you are looking for.

Perhaps I'm not being clear. 

Will Canon re-segment their FF portfolio to go from:

          Enthusiast / All-Around Pro / Niche High Detail

To:

          Good / Better / Best

...like what the competition is doing?  Will two competitive supercameras with bonkers throughput levels push Canon to follow suit?

- A
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: bholliman on November 22, 2017, 08:24:30 PM
I can't answer the poll since none of the choices are close to my opinion, which is:

The 5Ds(R) II will be a nice upgrade to its excellent predecessor. 
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: unfocused on November 22, 2017, 08:31:24 PM
I can't answer the poll since none of the choices are close to my opinion, which is:

The 5Ds(R) will be a nice upgrade to its excellent predecessor.

Correct answer. +1
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: unfocused on November 22, 2017, 08:52:16 PM
I don't see the basic formula changing. ...

Perhaps I'm not being clear. 

Will Canon re-segment their FF portfolio to go from:

          Enthusiast / All-Around Pro / Niche High Detail

To:

          Good / Better / Best

...like what the competition is doing?  Will two competitive supercameras with bonkers throughput levels push Canon to follow suit?

- A

I think you are being clear. It's just that I don't see what you are seeing. Canon already offers Good (6DII), Better (5DIV) and Best (1DxII). In addition, Canon has taken the "better" camera and made two different versions. One as a all-around version for pros, enthusiasts, semi-pros, etc., and one a specialized version for those who need or want the highest resolution possible.

I think you are splitting hairs, by lumping Nikon and Sony into one type of market differentiation and Canon into another.

If you are suggesting that there is room in Canon's lineup for something between either the 6D and 5D or between the 5D and 1Dx, that may be true. Although it seems to me that the space is pretty narrow.

I see far more space below the 6DII than between any models. Yet, at the same time, while there may be space below the 6D, based on specifications, I'm not sure there is any space based on price -- especially as the 6DII settles in at $1,600 or below. Canon has cut the price by $300 (through a very generous instant rebate) which is consistent with the way Canon marketed the original 6D -- which was also considered overpriced at introduction, but quickly dropped in price.

I think both Canon and Canon's customers may be perfectly happy to have a feature-rich full-frame camera that will soon go from being a disappointment to forum dwellers to an incredible bargain for people who actually buy cameras.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: tomscott on November 23, 2017, 04:28:17 AM
I for one am very excited about a MKII version full stop.

When it came out I was very skeptical, didn't need the MP, seemed too niche etc etc

In reality its a very usable camera in all applications and I dont think its that niche. I think add the MKIV body and features and the sensor tech with 50mp make it 6FPS and a little more responsive and it could be very close to a full all rounder. Great for landscape and studio work but very capable as a second camera for wedding events and portraiture. It could be a beast for wildlife, add a GPS it would be a great travel companion.

The issue for me for all the above but landscape and wildlife is the mp count is still a little prohibitive. I shoot around 2k of images at weddings and that on its own is around 50-70gb depending on the cameras I own. That would double then output too. If they could make an M raw around the 5DMKIV or 6DMKII file size with no compromises that would be awesome. Another cool idea is a crop mode to get more out of your lenses without cropping in post.

Asking far too much as that camera would make most of the range seem really niche.

Im not that interested in video but if they could add 1080 at 60 with DPAF that would be nice.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: tron on November 23, 2017, 07:31:05 AM
I just voted Dead on Arrival to help you move on to Sony :D

However, I will gladly upgrade my 5DsR to Mk II  when that is released  :D
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: jeffa4444 on November 23, 2017, 09:59:01 AM
The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.
You know the file size when you are buying it but 50mp tends to be a waste.
I think they crammed too many MP's in the sensor to get to fifty and overstretched it.
I've felt the same with the 7DII (similar if not same MP density).
It wasn't a great buy.
It is slow, there is a second or two delay between taking the photo and it displaying which I find annoying.
It performs best on a tripod at ISO100.
If they bring out a 5DSR Mark II it would need to be really excellent to convince me to upgrade.
The detail it would bring out would have to be a step above the 5D IV.
It's performance at ISO 1600 onwards would need to be alot better

Of course it could be mirrorless which would be a different take.
I think if Canon go mirrorless the first camera has to be very good.
I could not disagree more.
Ive taken thousands of shots with my 5DS mainly in the studio shooting portraits but also landscapes and even on a safari. One area it could do with improvement is low ISO no question but making a statement you cannot see differences between the 5D MKIII or even the 5D IV in details etc. so factually incorrect. The camera has consistently impressed in this area and as I shoot predominately at ISO 100 with a 160 shutter speed using strobes both the level of keepers, detail & sharpness have been a notch above the 5D MKIV not to say that camera is bad but to point out 50MP really does give great results when you nail exposure & focusing.

Would I buy a MKII if it improved over the MK1? In a heartbeat.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Hector1970 on November 26, 2017, 04:16:09 PM
The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.
You know the file size when you are buying it but 50mp tends to be a waste.
I think they crammed too many MP's in the sensor to get to fifty and overstretched it.
I've felt the same with the 7DII (similar if not same MP density).
It wasn't a great buy.
It is slow, there is a second or two delay between taking the photo and it displaying which I find annoying.
It performs best on a tripod at ISO100.
If they bring out a 5DSR Mark II it would need to be really excellent to convince me to upgrade.
The detail it would bring out would have to be a step above the 5D IV.
It's performance at ISO 1600 onwards would need to be alot better

Of course it could be mirrorless which would be a different take.
I think if Canon go mirrorless the first camera has to be very good.
I could not disagree more.
Ive taken thousands of shots with my 5DS mainly in the studio shooting portraits but also landscapes and even on a safari. One area it could do with improvement is low ISO no question but making a statement you cannot see differences between the 5D MKIII or even the 5D IV in details etc. so factually incorrect. The camera has consistently impressed in this area and as I shoot predominately at ISO 100 with a 160 shutter speed using strobes both the level of keepers, detail & sharpness have been a notch above the 5D MKIV not to say that camera is bad but to point out 50MP really does give great results when you nail exposure & focusing.

Would I buy a MKII if it improved over the MK1? In a heartbeat.
I've taken 10's of thousands of photographs with a 5DSR and other than perfect conditions eg ISO 100 it doesn't perform nearly as well as a 5DIII or a 5DIV. It performs best in a studio but then most gear does. It's not a bad camera but not worth the file size afterwards. As always I may have a bad copy but I'm not the first to be not fully supportive of it as a camera. If I had no camera and was buying a full frame I'd get the 5DIV first in a heartbeat.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Frodo on November 26, 2017, 07:46:09 PM
Hi Hector

I am surprised about your comments that the 5DsR has poorer image quality than the 5DIII and 5DIV.  I've never owned one of those cameras but I had a 5DII and now have a 6D (and the 6D is similar to the 5DIII).  Image quality has a range of dimensions.  Most commonly discussed is resolution.  You say "I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.".  I've compared my 6D to my 5DsR.  The increase in resolution is stunning.  At my first comparison I thought (incorrectly) I had misfocused the 6D!  The increase in resolution with good lenses is about in proportion to the increase in linear dimensions.  Even with my 24-105/4, the differences are dramatic. 

The next aspect is DR.  In initial testing, the DR seems similar to the 6D when downsampled to similar size files.  I do like the soft noise that the 5DsR produces in shadows - no blotches or banding so far, but this is with limited testing. Hi ISO noise? I use the 6D for landscape astrophotography and will soon see how well the 5DsR performs. 

I agree that at the pixel level, the other cameras might be better, but when downsampled to similar sizes, the 5DsR is better than the 6D and I assume the 5DIII. 

In terms of color tonality, I've shot one wedding and one event with the 5DsR and the images are fabulous.

I agree a little more DR would be nice.  My biggest issue is that LR conversion of mRaw files is poor, because you usually don't need all 50MP.  But when you do, its nice to have.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: GMCPhotographics on November 27, 2017, 04:38:04 AM
The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.
You know the file size when you are buying it but 50mp tends to be a waste.
I think they crammed too many MP's in the sensor to get to fifty and overstretched it.
I've felt the same with the 7DII (similar if not same MP density).
It wasn't a great buy.
It is slow, there is a second or two delay between taking the photo and it displaying which I find annoying.
It performs best on a tripod at ISO100.
If they bring out a 5DSR Mark II it would need to be really excellent to convince me to upgrade.
The detail it would bring out would have to be a step above the 5D IV.
It's performance at ISO 1600 onwards would need to be alot better

Of course it could be mirrorless which would be a different take.
I think if Canon go mirrorless the first camera has to be very good.
I could not disagree more.
Ive taken thousands of shots with my 5DS mainly in the studio shooting portraits but also landscapes and even on a safari. One area it could do with improvement is low ISO no question but making a statement you cannot see differences between the 5D MKIII or even the 5D IV in details etc. so factually incorrect. The camera has consistently impressed in this area and as I shoot predominately at ISO 100 with a 160 shutter speed using strobes both the level of keepers, detail & sharpness have been a notch above the 5D MKIV not to say that camera is bad but to point out 50MP really does give great results when you nail exposure & focusing.

Would I buy a MKII if it improved over the MK1? In a heartbeat.
I've taken 10's of thousands of photographs with a 5DSR and other than perfect conditions eg ISO 100 it doesn't perform nearly as well as a 5DIII or a 5DIV. It performs best in a studio but then most gear does. It's not a bad camera but not worth the file size afterwards. As always I may have a bad copy but I'm not the first to be not fully supportive of it as a camera. If I had no camera and was buying a full frame I'd get the 5DIV first in a heartbeat.

Yes I'm with you here. When the 5DSR was announced I looked at the spec and thought that the 5DIII/IV was a far more versatile camera. I don't need that silly high MP and it'll just put a huge strain on my workflow, storage and shooting requirement. A camera with that kind of resolution will need a tripod for most of the time, the reciprocal shutter speed rule breaks down and it's it's pretty clear that it'll be an iso 100 only camera (compared to a mk4).
I figured that Canon was forced to make this camera to appease the forum fan boys who have a hunger for maxxed out MP...but hey it's not 2005 any more and 25-30mp is more than adequate.
While I appreciate that it's an amazing niche camera and it's a technical marvel, I do question it's application as a  photographic tool. In most uses a mk4 is a wiser choice.
For my shooting (a lot of portraits, weddings and fair bit of landscape and a little bit of wildlife) I just don't need noisy large files. So I'm happy with the regular 5D series cameras.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: docsmith on November 27, 2017, 05:28:20 AM
If only there were a leak to give me a reason not to buy the a7Riii

What a ridiculous poll. Three negative choices, one pretty irrelevant and the only positive choice so distorted in unlikely features that it is difficult to expect them and check that box.

+1. 

I can't find the option for "It will only offer 80% as much as the competition but it will work reliably and seamlessly with my other gear and will sell really well" on this poll.

- A

^^^  This....and...

I can't answer the poll since none of the choices are close to my opinion, which is:

The 5Ds(R) II will be a nice upgrade to its excellent predecessor. 

^^^^This....

The 5Ds II will be a very capable, methodical upgrade.  As others have said, on-chip conversion, Wi-Fi, gps, lower light AF (-3 or 4 EV), a few more MP (24 APS-C sensors scaled up is 62.5 MP), latest dual digic 7, 5DIV form factor, 6 fps, DPAF, and some video features (4K at 30 fps, FHD at 60 fps, etc).  In short, some improvements, but mostly a 5DIV with a larger sensor.

If that does not interest you, buy the Sony.  But people seem to really like the 5DsR and I am sure the Mk II will be better.

As for me, my 5DIII took amazing pictures.  And a few test runs with the 5DIV and I am very happy with the upgrade (mostly AF and Wi-Fi at this point).  I've played with Sony's in stores and did not come away happy.  Plus, when I mock assemble my entire kit, Canon wins hands down.  But, to each their own.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: tron on November 27, 2017, 07:30:30 AM
If only there were a leak to give me a reason not to buy the a7Riii

What a ridiculous poll. Three negative choices, one pretty irrelevant and the only positive choice so distorted in unlikely features that it is difficult to expect them and check that box.

+1. 

I can't find the option for "It will only offer 80% as much as the competition but it will work reliably and seamlessly with my other gear and will sell really well" on this poll.

- A

^^^  This....and...

I can't answer the poll since none of the choices are close to my opinion, which is:

The 5Ds(R) II will be a nice upgrade to its excellent predecessor. 

^^^^This....

The 5Ds II will be a very capable, methodical upgrade.  As others have said, on-chip conversion, Wi-Fi, gps, lower light AF (-3 or 4 EV), a few more MP (24 APS-C sensors scaled up is 62.5 MP), latest dual digic 7, 5DIV form factor, 6 fps, DPAF, and some video features (4K at 30 fps, FHD at 60 fps, etc).  In short, some improvements, but mostly a 5DIV with a larger sensor.

If that does not interest you, buy the Sony.  But people seem to really like the 5DsR and I am sure the Mk II will be better.

As for me, my 5DIII took amazing pictures.  And a few test runs with the 5DIV and I am very happy with the upgrade (mostly AF and Wi-Fi at this point).  I've played with Sony's in stores and did not come away happy.  Plus, when I mock assemble my entire kit, Canon wins hands down.  But, to each their own.
+1 on the features. Down to earth and useful. The only thing is that with these features Canon can release it today (OK I mean Q1, Q2 2018). Were to wait a little longer, I would expect them to have an even newer digic and make it 7fps. In all cases they could increase buffer a little.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Talys on November 27, 2017, 01:27:54 PM
If that does not interest you, buy the Sony.  But people seem to really like the 5DsR and I am sure the Mk II will be better.

As for me, my 5DIII took amazing pictures.  And a few test runs with the 5DIV and I am very happy with the upgrade (mostly AF and Wi-Fi at this point).  I've played with Sony's in stores and did not come away happy.  Plus, when I mock assemble my entire kit, Canon wins hands down.  But, to each their own.

This.  I don't know why people can't just go buy their really awesome techno gizmo be happy, and stop griping about how Canon is going to go out of business.  I have played with 5DSRII in the field and 5DSRIII in the store, and neither come close to making me happy or convincing me to pull the trigger on what would be a very expensive system that trades a lot of usability and built-like-a-tank ruggedness for a better sensor and a big bag of tricks that is mostly not very useful to me. 

The price of glass matters to me too; the Sony system is awesomely expensive if you want their top-end zooms -- nearly twice the price compared to Canon sale/street prices on popular lenses like 70-200/2.8 or 100-400, and nearly four times the price as third party lenses for Canon; plus, often, their second-tier alternatives are poor.

Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: CanonFanBoy on November 27, 2017, 02:33:15 PM
I own a 1Dx, 1Dx mk2 and 5DsR...theres no bias...its honesty. Canon cant help itself from protecting the cinema line to make the camera that needs to be made. Also hows it gonna handicap the 5DsR mk2 to protect the 5D mk4. We all know the 5DsR wont be 4k60p...but it should be and not at 800mbps. Will it have 4k hdmi out...probably not. Now I cant do 4k live streams. I dont want to switch. I hate the way the a9 feels in my hands and ive shot over 7,000 pics with it. I want DPAF but whats the point if I need to spend over 1,000 per hour of CFast2 4k60p. Im willing to live with GOOD ENOUGH video AF sony has now.

Id pay 6,000 for a 5DsR mk2 with low light equal to the a7r iii, 4k 60p, IBIS, 4k hdmi out, 8-10 fps, 50 RAW frame buffer uncompressed, DPAF, wifi. Thats all very realistic. If I saw a leak that it was coming out next summer Id wait for it unless the A7Siii pulled me away from the C200.

I want canon to do better. Im not gonna make excuses for it to keep being less than it should be.

Oh and my 5DsR is USELESS for profesisonal video. thats really the biggest thing pushing me away from it. Hell a canon xf400 has DPAF and 4k60P out.

The whole premise that Canon is protecting the Cinema line is flawed, as is the premise that Canon will be protecting the 5D mark IV from it. Canon builds Cameras to reach a particular market. Heck! maybe Canon is protecting the 5DSr from the 5D mark IV. See how that works? It's just silly.

The camera isn't what it should be? Yeah, people want $10,000 cameras at powershot prices. ::)
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: CanonFanBoy on November 27, 2017, 02:35:50 PM
The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.

What lenses, what setup? The difference between 5DSR and 5D III is night and day - with the right lenses.

Nifty fifty.  ::)
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: CanonFanBoy on November 27, 2017, 02:43:06 PM
Such a nonsense. But I have to congratulate the marketing departments of the camera companies. They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough. Youtube also has a significant share in this stupidity.

If you know what you are doing there is zero possibility that there is a picture you cant take because you have "just" a 5dmk4 or a 1DXmk2. I still have a original 1DX and all my big prints look amazing. Just 18 MPix. More than enough.

I've never had or seen a marketing department tell me that my gear isn't good enough. I decide that. People who let marketing depts. make decisions for them are not thinking and and fit into the "drone" category. If Canon can take their money, then they deserve to have it taken.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: CanonFanBoy on November 27, 2017, 02:50:34 PM
What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography?  Can you use it hand-held?  Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?   

Just speaking to the lens question, as Uncle Rog shows here...

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests/

...a rising tide lifts all boats, but better boats are lifted higher.  All lenses in his test (3 very good + 1 older/used/banged up) show a greater resolving power on the finer 50 MP canvas, but the quality of the lens dictates how much better it gets.

- A

This part got a giggle out of me. If only the 5DSr could take EF-S lenses.  :o

"Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?"
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Talys on November 27, 2017, 03:36:06 PM
Such a nonsense. But I have to congratulate the marketing departments of the camera companies. They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough. Youtube also has a significant share in this stupidity.

If you know what you are doing there is zero possibility that there is a picture you cant take because you have "just" a 5dmk4 or a 1DXmk2. I still have a original 1DX and all my big prints look amazing. Just 18 MPix. More than enough.

I've never had or seen a marketing department tell me that my gear isn't good enough. I decide that. People who let marketing depts. make decisions for them are not thinking and and fit into the "drone" category. If Canon can take their money, then they deserve to have it taken.

Every camera company does it, indirectly, in the same way that car manufacturers and smartphone makers tell you that your current stuff isn't good enough.

First, they describe the new model as the best version ever, the pinnacle of technology and back it up with a bunch of 3 and 4 letter acronyms. Because your current gear doesn't have the latest alphabet soup, it's inferior to the latest model.

Second, they tease you with amazing samples that most people dream of. For cars, it's lifestyle, like driving in picturesque rugged outdoors or racing down a desert stretch, or a beautiful woman throwing her hair in the wind. For cameras, it's a perfect shot of a photographer happily taking photos from a kayak in the perfect lake (seen the latest Canon Best in Glass ads in the movies?). For a cell phone, it's visualizing orcas or a perfectly fit, beautiful person doing something fun or active.

In common is that what's holding you back is your stuff. Buy the latest stuff and this lifestyle and happiness can be yours too!  Capture these perfect droplets of water and swooping eagles with just a snap of the shutter!

But, I mean, I don't fault them for it. They are aspirational ads, and if you fall for shiny new car = meet random beautiful woman while driving down the road or buy new camera = perfect photos from perfect outdoor adventures, you should probably be prepared for disappointment :D
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: CanonFanBoy on November 27, 2017, 08:25:30 PM
Such a nonsense. But I have to congratulate the marketing departments of the camera companies. They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough. Youtube also has a significant share in this stupidity.

If you know what you are doing there is zero possibility that there is a picture you cant take because you have "just" a 5dmk4 or a 1DXmk2. I still have a original 1DX and all my big prints look amazing. Just 18 MPix. More than enough.

I've never had or seen a marketing department tell me that my gear isn't good enough. I decide that. People who let marketing depts. make decisions for them are not thinking and and fit into the "drone" category. If Canon can take their money, then they deserve to have it taken.

Every camera company does it, indirectly, in the same way that car manufacturers and smartphone makers tell you that your current stuff isn't good enough.

First, they describe the new model as the best version ever, the pinnacle of technology and back it up with a bunch of 3 and 4 letter acronyms. Because your current gear doesn't have the latest alphabet soup, it's inferior to the latest model.

Second, they tease you with amazing samples that most people dream of. For cars, it's lifestyle, like driving in picturesque rugged outdoors or racing down a desert stretch, or a beautiful woman throwing her hair in the wind. For cameras, it's a perfect shot of a photographer happily taking photos from a kayak in the perfect lake (seen the latest Canon Best in Glass ads in the movies?). For a cell phone, it's visualizing orcas or a perfectly fit, beautiful person doing something fun or active.

In common is that what's holding you back is your stuff. Buy the latest stuff and this lifestyle and happiness can be yours too!  Capture these perfect droplets of water and swooping eagles with just a snap of the shutter!

But, I mean, I don't fault them for it. They are aspirational ads, and if you fall for shiny new car = meet random beautiful woman while driving down the road or buy new camera = perfect photos from perfect outdoor adventures, you should probably be prepared for disappointment :D

Well, I guess I see it as showing us what the new product offers. When Canon shows a new Camera or lens I don't feel that what I have is inferior and don't feel that is what Canon is trying to do. If I think my "gear" is now inferior because of something new... that's my problem. My gear might very well be inferior to something new. That's the point of a new product... to make something better.

There are people posting here often saying stuff that came out last year or even getting ready to come out are somehow obsolete already. The great thing about photography is that it is usually the photographer who is inferior to his gear.

Example: In many ways the 5D mark III is inferior to the Mark IV. But, I decide to wait on the Mark V.

While the point of marketing is to entice people to buy, I don't see it as a nefarious act by marketing. Afterall, without marketing we wouldn't know that many things even existed.  :)

"They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough."

I still must disagree with that statement. Canon never tells me that. They just point out the features of the new product. The 5D mark III is good enough for me, but I'll still buy a Mark V. Why? Because my Mark III will probably be about 7 years old and I'll want something new. It isn't that I'll think it isn't good enough.

My 1968 Ford Fairlane GT was plenty good enough. Got me from A-B just fine. It was a tool and worked very well. I wanted newer tech. That's all.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: stevelee on November 28, 2017, 02:33:29 AM
I got a 6D2 almost two months ago. I have been more than pleased with the purchase, and more importantly, with the pictures and video I have shot in that time. I'm still learning how to do things, and learning things I can do that I didn't know about before. The 24-105 STM lens has been a good addition to my arsenal. The weak point in my gear is the 75-300mm zoom as the only lens longer than the 105. I had made surprisingly good eclipse pictures with it on my T3i, so it is not a piece of junk, just disappointing relative to everything else I use, especially in terms of CA. Maybe I'll be able to replace it some time next year.

The main insight that I have from this process that I think is relevant to this discussion is my realization that I never really learned to exploit all the potential of the T3i. Although I bought two books on that camera model, I think I have already spent more time reading the extended 6D2 manual than in did over 5 or 6 years reading about the T3i. It helps that I have the PDF manual on my iPad, so it is handy leisure reading between doing other things. And obviously new toys get the most attention.

I will be doing a fair amount of travel over the holidays, and the DSLRs will stay home, and I'll be shooting with my pocketable G7X II. I've been quite pleased with the results from it. It will be interesting to see what I miss having after shooting FF with a fair number of features.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: tron on November 28, 2017, 07:16:19 AM
If I were to guess:   T7/1400D: first half of 2018, 7DIII : second half of 2018 (sorry for being conservative/realistic) 5DsR II: 2019. Of course I would welcome an earlier upgrade.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Sporgon on December 03, 2017, 07:42:35 AM

Yes I'm with you here. When the 5DSR was announced I looked at the spec and thought that the 5DIII/IV was a far more versatile camera. I don't need that silly high MP and it'll just put a huge strain on my workflow, storage and shooting requirement.

While I appreciate that it's an amazing niche camera and it's a technical marvel, I do question it's application as a  photographic tool.

 I just don't need noisy large files. So I'm happy with the regular 5D series cameras.

I'm not sure this is the right way to look at it. File storage is cheap. Computer processing is not, but then as most likely a raw shooter with decent software you can just convert your CR2 files to the same size as your 22 mp 5DIII or whatever, so processing is not slowed down at all. The excessively high mp goes towards reducing the colour definition limitations of the Bayer array effect, so theoretically you gain from interpolating the larger file down, and still have the option of the full size file if you should ever want it. Likewise the reduction reduces noise down to the same levels as those cameras of equal vintage and mp that you are reducing to. The only drawback is the speed of the camera really, which may or may not be important. If you're a jpeg shooter then just use a smaller jpeg setting !
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: jasonwei on December 03, 2017, 09:22:37 AM
Hope it will come out earlier.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Talys on December 03, 2017, 12:32:58 PM
"They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough."

I still must disagree with that statement. Canon never tells me that. They just point out the features of the new product. The 5D mark III is good enough for me, but I'll still buy a Mark V. Why? Because my Mark III will probably be about 7 years old and I'll want something new. It isn't that I'll think it isn't good enough.

My 1968 Ford Fairlane GT was plenty good enough. Got me from A-B just fine. It was a tool and worked very well. I wanted newer tech. That's all.

Fair enough :) 

It's just funny that you say it, because I've been seeing Canon ads in the movies quite often recently -- and being someone who loves wildlife/nature photography, I sure do wish I could take shots like that :D  However, I fully understand that it has absolutely nothing to do with me owning a 6DII rather than the 5DIV the guy has in the video, hehehe.

Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Mancubus on December 03, 2017, 01:32:38 PM
Here is how to make a successful 5DSR2:

- Take a Canon 5D4
- Get rid of the damn AA filter
- Bump the resolution to 50+ MP
- Give it a medium (~30MP) and a small (~20MP) RAW file option that uses the sensor in a clever way getting more light on each pixel instead of just resizing a 50MP file
- Update anything that is over 10 years old (like the 4K codec and the SD card)
- Don't f**k up anything that you're not supposed to (such as giving it a s**t DR like the 6D2)

Do this and I'd gladly pay 4000usd for it.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: 3kramd5 on December 03, 2017, 02:47:42 PM
Here is how to make a successful 5DSR2:


- Give it a medium (~30MP) and a small (~20MP) RAW file option that uses the sensor in a clever way getting more light on each pixel instead of just resizing a 50MP file

Do this and I'd gladly pay 4000usd for it.

You might as well have said you’d pay 40,000USD for it.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Sporgon on December 03, 2017, 03:21:24 PM
Here is how to make a successful 5DSR2:

- Get rid of the damn AA filter...

 I thought that in time the "r" would have a disproportionately higher used value to the plain "s", in a similar way to what happened with the Nikon D800, and so the extra £200 spent on a new "r" would be money well spent in the long term. However here in the U.K. it seems that on the used market the "s" is making the same or even more money. Certainly there are a lot less "s" ones for sale.

So I guess that there are many out there who would disagree about leaving the "damn" AA filter out  ;)

Certainly for myself I went for the 5Ds and had to go to more lengths to get one. My local pro dealer has them on back order........
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Mancubus on December 05, 2017, 04:35:47 AM
Here is how to make a successful 5DSR2:


- Give it a medium (~30MP) and a small (~20MP) RAW file option that uses the sensor in a clever way getting more light on each pixel instead of just resizing a 50MP file

Do this and I'd gladly pay 4000usd for it.


You might as well have said you’d pay 40,000USD for it.


Why is that? It doesn't seem impossible, just a way of getting more light (using more sensor area) per pixel when not using the camera in the maximum megapixel setting.

To my understanding, that would allow some noise level similar to a 1DX Mark II (even less noise if technology improves). Much better than having the camera just resizing what would be a regular 50+ MP file.

Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: midluk on December 05, 2017, 11:46:47 AM
Why is that? It doesn't seem impossible, just a way of getting more light (using more sensor area) per pixel when not using the camera in the maximum megapixel setting.

To my understanding, that would allow some noise level similar to a 1DX Mark II (even less noise if technology improves). Much better than having the camera just resizing what would be a regular 50+ MP file.
Can you specify what you mean by "resizing"?
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: 3kramd5 on December 05, 2017, 10:52:53 PM
Here is how to make a successful 5DSR2:


- Give it a medium (~30MP) and a small (~20MP) RAW file option that uses the sensor in a clever way getting more light on each pixel instead of just resizing a 50MP file

Do this and I'd gladly pay 4000usd for it.


You might as well have said you’d pay 40,000USD for it.


Why is that? It doesn't seem impossible, just a way of getting more light (using more sensor area) per pixel when not using the camera in the maximum megapixel setting.

But it is impossible. Sensor area is a fixed quantity and you can’t get more of it by using fewer pixels. You can bin pixels, but they don’t benefit from additional light.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Sporgon on December 06, 2017, 12:10:02 AM
The current 5Ds (sr) will take a remarkable amount of over-exposure at low ISO without loss of saturation / colour accuracy. If less noise is your goal just over-expose and reduce in post.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Mancubus on December 06, 2017, 03:06:23 AM
Can you specify what you mean by "resizing"?

Taking a photo normally (full resolution), and then the camera processes it to create a smaller file with just less pixels.



But it is impossible. Sensor area is a fixed quantity and you can’t get more of it by using fewer pixels. You can bin pixels, but they don’t benefit from additional light.

The total sensor area is constant, but when you reduce the number of pixels on the raw file, each pixel will have more area to obtain information from.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: traveller on December 06, 2017, 04:50:14 AM
The current 5Ds (sr) will take a remarkable amount of over-exposure at low ISO without loss of saturation / colour accuracy. If less noise is your goal just over-expose and reduce in post.

Doesn’t this just mean that the histogram is very inaccurate in RAW and the meter underexposes? I’m not criticising Canon alone, just about every camera (other than the Phase One XF with the latest IQ3 backs) does the same.

On my 5D3, I set the “Neutral” picture style, then customise it by lowering the contrast to minimum and bumping up the sharpness a little (4, -4, 0, 0). I find this makes the histogram closer to the RAW file, while still allowing focus evaluation on the rear screen. It has zero effect on the file imported into Lightroom/ACR (I can’t speak for other RAW converters).
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: sanj on December 06, 2017, 10:13:16 AM
The current 5Ds (sr) will take a remarkable amount of over-exposure at low ISO without loss of saturation / colour accuracy. If less noise is your goal just over-expose and reduce in post.

This, to ME sounds like the old film days mentality. I used to 1/4 over expose 400 plus ISO film regularly. I doubt if this is good idea today.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: tron on December 06, 2017, 10:18:25 AM
If you must overexpose you have to do it within reason because blown highlights cannot be recovered and since the histogram can be made approximate but not exact to raw histogram I would suggest to not only overexpose (a little) but to bracket as well to be on the safe side.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: 3kramd5 on December 06, 2017, 10:20:55 AM
Can you specify what you mean by "resizing"?

Taking a photo normally (full resolution), and then the camera processes it to create a smaller file with just less pixels.



But it is impossible. Sensor area is a fixed quantity and you can’t get more of it by using fewer pixels. You can bin pixels, but they don’t benefit from additional light.

The total sensor area is constant, but when you reduce the number of pixels on the raw file, each pixel will have more area to obtain information from.

A raw file doesn’t have pixels, it just has data. Since you started off by saying to use “the sensor in a clever way getting more light on each pixel,” I thought you were discussing physical pixels.

It sounds like what you are describing is binning: https://web.stanford.edu/group/vista/cgi-bin/wiki/index.php/Pixel_Binning
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Mancubus on December 06, 2017, 11:03:21 AM

It sounds like what you are describing is binning: https://web.stanford.edu/group/vista/cgi-bin/wiki/index.php/Pixel_Binning

Exactly! I didn't know the word but that's what I meant. This is what I want the 5DSR2 to do and get small/medium raw files that are better than simply resizing a full sized one.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: stevelee on December 06, 2017, 03:20:10 PM
This, to ME sounds like the old film days mentality. I used to 1/4 over expose 400 plus ISO film regularly. I doubt if this is good idea today.

As I recall, it was better to overexpose negative film a bit, and to underexpose slide film a bit. One might argue that just meant giving each a proper exposure.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Sporgon on December 06, 2017, 03:56:12 PM
The current 5Ds (sr) will take a remarkable amount of over-exposure at low ISO without loss of saturation / colour accuracy. If less noise is your goal just over-expose and reduce in post.

Doesn’t this just mean that the histogram is very inaccurate in RAW and the meter underexposes? I’m not criticising Canon alone, just about every camera (other than the Phase One XF with the latest IQ3 backs) does the same.

On my 5D3, I set the “Neutral” picture style, then customise it by lowering the contrast to minimum and bumping up the sharpness a little (4, -4, 0, 0). I find this makes the histogram closer to the RAW file, while still allowing focus evaluation on the rear screen. It has zero effect on the file imported into Lightroom/ACR (I can’t speak for other RAW converters).

Not that the meter is inaccurate. Histogram yes, and I too set “ neutral” , very flat for preview. Slight over exposure just floods the pixels a little more, and as long as you don’t overdo it then reduction in post reduces noise. So you’re not actually using the “correct” exposure. Same with negative film in the old days, in fact even now with modern emulsions like Portra it’s virtually impossible to over expose it. Transparencies over exposed where awful and thin though I’m not sure if after scanning you’d pull the colours back - all my transparencies are under exposed if anything !
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: traveller on December 07, 2017, 06:35:13 AM
The current 5Ds (sr) will take a remarkable amount of over-exposure at low ISO without loss of saturation / colour accuracy. If less noise is your goal just over-expose and reduce in post.

Doesn’t this just mean that the histogram is very inaccurate in RAW and the meter underexposes? I’m not criticising Canon alone, just about every camera (other than the Phase One XF with the latest IQ3 backs) does the same.

On my 5D3, I set the “Neutral” picture style, then customise it by lowering the contrast to minimum and bumping up the sharpness a little (4, -4, 0, 0). I find this makes the histogram closer to the RAW file, while still allowing focus evaluation on the rear screen. It has zero effect on the file imported into Lightroom/ACR (I can’t speak for other RAW converters).

Not that the meter is inaccurate. Histogram yes, and I too set “ neutral” , very flat for preview. Slight over exposure just floods the pixels a little more, and as long as you don’t overdo it then reduction in post reduces noise. So you’re not actually using the “correct” exposure. Same with negative film in the old days, in fact even now with modern emulsions like Portra it’s virtually impossible to over expose it. Transparencies over exposed where awful and thin though I’m not sure if after scanning you’d pull the colours back - all my transparencies are under exposed if anything !

If, when shooting in RAW, you call reliably pull back a full stop of highlights without losing colour information from multiple channels clipping, then the correct RAW exposure was one full stop more than the meter suggested. The camera makers have not really adjusted their meter programming from the days when they had to account for people shooting films with different exposure latitudes (actually, they probably could have fitted a mode switch back then: by the end, exposure latitude was even DX encoded on 35mm film canisters!).

How long have people been asking for an "expose to the right" metering mode, perhaps with user specifiable maximum percentage (all) channel clipping thresholds? It's my (personal) highest priority request to Canon: give users customisation controls on the camera metering, like already exist for the AF system. I would love Canon to include an ETTR meter mode that allows me to specify how much of the frame is allowed to clip and also to customise how much priority the meter gives to the active AF point.

With regard to film comparisons, digital is far more like slide film with very sharp overexposure clipping. Digital achieves more of what we now call 'dynamic range' by having even greater shadow recovery potential than slide film (even on older Canon sensors), not by having vastly more headroom in the highlights. In signal:noise ratio terms, both positive (slide) film and digital (even more so) have a better SNR overall than negative film, especially so in the shadow areas, but negative film has a more gradual drop off in the SNR in the highlights:

http://clarkvision.com/articles/exposure_latitude-1/ (http://clarkvision.com/articles/exposure_latitude-1/)
http://clarkvision.com/articles/digital.signal.to.noise/ (http://clarkvision.com/articles/digital.signal.to.noise/)

Effectively, this means that the exposure strategy for both digital and positive film is the same: expose for the highlights. The difficulty is judging where the highlight clipping point is, based upon the limited information from the camera. You either use a spot meter and mathematics, underexpose "for safety" (not ideal), or with digital -use the information provided by the histogram. The issue with most current digital cameras is that the meter and histogram are both based upon the correct jpeg exposure.

RAW headroom comes as a result of the demosaicing of the bayer array data: i.e. in the same way that generating a full-res RGB image relies on the "educated guesswork" of the RAW converter's demosaicing algorithm, so the data in a fully saturated 'pixel' can be reconstructed by extrapolating its value based upon the values of the adjacent non-clipped 'pixels'. Obviously, once the adjacent 'pixels' are also clipped there is no way to accurately "guess" the colour, which gives us the upper limit of RAW headroom. The camera companies seem very reluctant to give advanced users the tools they need to extract optimum exposure from their cameras. We can use RawDigger to establish the general relationship between our camera's meter/histogram and the actual RAW values, but it would be good if we could access more of this sort of data at the time of shooting. Perhaps the camera companies feel that it is easier just to provide bracketing modes, but this doesn't help with moving subjects.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Mikehit on December 07, 2017, 07:16:29 AM
...
The issue with most current digital cameras is that the meter and histogram are both based upon the correct jpeg exposure.

RAW headroom comes as a result of the demosaicing of the bayer array data: i.e. in the same way that generating a full-res RGB image relies on the "educated guesswork" of the RAW converter's demosaicing algorithm, so the data in a fully saturated 'pixel' can be reconstructed by extrapolating its value based upon the values of the adjacent non-clipped 'pixels'. Obviously, once the adjacent 'pixels' are also clipped there is no way to accurately "guess" the colour, which gives us the upper limit of RAW headroom. The camera companies seem very reluctant to give advanced users the tools they need to extract optimum exposure from their cameras. We can use RawDigger to establish the general relationship between our camera's meter/histogram and the actual RAW values, but it would be good if we could access more of this sort of data at the time of shooting. Perhaps the camera companies feel that it is easier just to provide bracketing modes, but this doesn't help with moving subjects.

I sometimes wonder if we are getting to the point where the technology makes things possible and people are demanding functionality for no other reason than in theory they can do it. And comments like 'if you thought that way they would not have developed AF' type of argument.

Bracket some shots, compare the raw and the histogram and take it from there. I know on my 7D2 I can take the jpeg histogram and add a stop - does it really matter if you are 1/3 of a stop more'accurate' for ETTR? In a landscape shot the perfect light is so fleeting you will not have time to take a test under the ideal lighting, wait for the camera to crunch the raw histogram and adjust the settings.
Add to this that the histogram depends on the white balance you use so a raw histogram can actually be misleading and blow colour channels if you try too hard to get as far ETTR as possible. So you end up being conservative and no more accurate than if you take 'jpeg histogram +1 stop'.

I have read several comments by pros saying that  the dynamic range of any DSLR is now so good it makes ETTR almost redundant.

And just to be cheeky: given the profound claims about the usability of a 5-stop push to an underexposed image, and the wonderful linearity of new sensors, why on earth are people worrying about the histogram anyways?
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: 3kramd5 on December 07, 2017, 10:29:47 AM
If, when shooting in RAW, you call reliably pull back a full stop of highlights without losing colour information from multiple channels clipping, then the correct RAW exposure was one full stop more than the meter suggested.

That would only be a true statement if the metering program was ETTR, but it isn’t.

Rather than auto-ETTR, I’d just like a raw histogram in live view.

I have read several comments by pros saying that  the dynamic range of any DSLR is now so good it makes ETTR almost redundant.

And just to be cheeky: given the profound claims about the usability of a 5-stop push to an underexposed image, and the wonderful linearity of new sensors, why on earth are people worrying about the histogram anyways?

Just to be pedantic: because the ability to make a shadow brighter without introducing overpowering noise doesn’t reveal detailed in that shadow which weren’t recorded. The signal is still the signal. Exposing to the extreme end of saturation allows maximum signal and thus detail to be recorded.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: RGF on December 07, 2017, 11:47:18 AM
It seems that after some problems with the 1D Mark 2 or 3 (?) Canon has been a lot more cautious about introducing new equipment, especially bodies.  It seems to me that they want to avoid negative market reaction.  But then again, given how (pick your term, detailed oriented users, hyper-critical bunch of whiners) we are, they seems to slow with new introductions.  The 5Ds/R was the first "breakthrough" in a while.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: traveller on December 07, 2017, 12:19:20 PM
...
The issue with most current digital cameras is that the meter and histogram are both based upon the correct jpeg exposure.

RAW headroom comes as a result of the demosaicing of the bayer array data: i.e. in the same way that generating a full-res RGB image relies on the "educated guesswork" of the RAW converter's demosaicing algorithm, so the data in a fully saturated 'pixel' can be reconstructed by extrapolating its value based upon the values of the adjacent non-clipped 'pixels'. Obviously, once the adjacent 'pixels' are also clipped there is no way to accurately "guess" the colour, which gives us the upper limit of RAW headroom. The camera companies seem very reluctant to give advanced users the tools they need to extract optimum exposure from their cameras. We can use RawDigger to establish the general relationship between our camera's meter/histogram and the actual RAW values, but it would be good if we could access more of this sort of data at the time of shooting. Perhaps the camera companies feel that it is easier just to provide bracketing modes, but this doesn't help with moving subjects.

I sometimes wonder if we are getting to the point where the technology makes things possible and people are demanding functionality for no other reason than in theory they can do it. And comments like 'if you thought that way they would not have developed AF' type of argument.

Bracket some shots, compare the raw and the histogram and take it from there. I know on my 7D2 I can take the jpeg histogram and add a stop - does it really matter if you are 1/3 of a stop more'accurate' for ETTR? In a landscape shot the perfect light is so fleeting you will not have time to take a test under the ideal lighting, wait for the camera to crunch the raw histogram and adjust the settings.
Add to this that the histogram depends on the white balance you use so a raw histogram can actually be misleading and blow colour channels if you try too hard to get as far ETTR as possible. So you end up being conservative and no more accurate than if you take 'jpeg histogram +1 stop'.

I have read several comments by pros saying that  the dynamic range of any DSLR is now so good it makes ETTR almost redundant.

And just to be cheeky: given the profound claims about the usability of a 5-stop push to an underexposed image, and the wonderful linearity of new sensors, why on earth are people worrying about the histogram anyways?

Exactly, why do we need autofocus, when we can just take a few shots at different distances and check the rear screen to see which is best?

I know that you were being tongue in cheek, but in all seriousness those 5 stop shadow pushes are often still not enough for contre-jour shots, especially when you haven’t properly ETTR’d the exposure, or you are much above base ISO. That being said, I find myself pushing the exposure to the right less often with my Fuji than with my Canon, at low ISO anyway. 
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: stevelee on December 07, 2017, 01:22:54 PM
Several thoughts:

The histogram you see on the screen is based on the theoretical resultant JPEG rather than the linear RAW file, so it is difficult to judge how to adjust the exposure, particularly ETTR, from that readout. In a very low contrast situation, though, you can probably get away with it. I think there is a lot of value in trying things and gaining experience, the more of which you have with your particular camera, the better your judgment of what you can get away with should become.

I have read that ETTR is pointless except at base ISO. That might not be quite literally true for near-base settings, but maybe it is. Anyhow, if ETTR means you are doubling the ISO and quintupling the noise, then you've introduced a lot more problems than you've solved.

My experience has been that if there is any information at all in any channel of the brightest parts of the scene, then the Highlights slider in ACR (and presumably the same in LR) does a good job faking details in the other channels. The main need I've had for this, as I recall, is when I want some detail in clouds. Moving the slider way to the left can make the sky look downright threatening sometimes, which is vastly beyond the tweaking I need. So for my purposes, highlight recovery usually works better than boosting the shadows more than one stop. I'm usually not interested in bringing out the spider webs in the dark corners for interiors, and indeed I find too much attention to insignificant detail to be more of a distraction in the picture. I do however like to have detail in windows, particularly stained glass, while giving a good view of architectural details. The Highlights slider is usually not sufficient for that, for me anyway, so I shoot separate exposures for the windows and merge, such as in this picture of a chapel in Edinburgh, shot with my G7X II. I preferred the as-shot convergence over a corrected perspective. My goal is usually to make the picture look like what I saw when I was there. This printed up nicely on 13" x 19" paper, and I plan to frame it to hang in my hallway gallery when I get around to it.

(http://www.stevelee.name/britain/scotland/edinburgh/IMG_2601-HDR.jpg)
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Mikehit on December 07, 2017, 05:27:13 PM

Just to be pedantic: because the ability to make a shadow brighter without introducing overpowering noise doesn’t reveal detailed in that shadow which weren’t recorded. The signal is still the signal. Exposing to the extreme end of saturation allows maximum signal and thus detail to be recorded.
My point was, the difference between jpeg histogram + 1 stop (or whatever you think is right) it surely good enough. Is the 1/3 stop (or whatever it is) by using a raw histogram really going to make or break an image?
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: Mikehit on December 07, 2017, 05:29:19 PM


I know that you were being tongue in cheek, but in all seriousness those 5 stop shadow pushes are often still not enough for contre-jour shots, especially when you haven’t properly ETTR’d the exposure, or you are much above base ISO. That being said, I find myself pushing the exposure to the right less often with my Fuji than with my Canon, at low ISO anyway.

But if its contre jour even the raw histogram becomes meaningless because the whole idea of contre jour is that the highlights blow out to the point that even a raw histogram will not tell you if the part you are interested in is within the dynamic range of the histogram.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: 3kramd5 on December 08, 2017, 08:52:01 PM

Just to be pedantic: because the ability to make a shadow brighter without introducing overpowering noise doesn’t reveal detailed in that shadow which weren’t recorded. The signal is still the signal. Exposing to the extreme end of saturation allows maximum signal and thus detail to be recorded.
My point was, the difference between jpeg histogram + 1 stop (or whatever you think is right) it surely good enough. Is the 1/3 stop (or whatever it is) by using a raw histogram really going to make or break an image?

Maybe, maybe not, but why not make it possible to truly ETTR without trial and error?

Here’s another one: let me dial in exposure time on a touch screen rather, at let me exceed 30 seconds without an extra device.
Title: Re: The 5DsR mk2
Post by: RGF on December 10, 2017, 01:05:39 PM
Wonder if the Nikon D850 will put enough pressure on Canon to up their game.

They are already in a dead heat with Nikon D5 vs 1DxM2 (some could argue one or other is winner but IMO these camera are very close in features)

The 5DM4 is a great camera, I think unchallenged by the Nikon

Nikon's D850, though lower in MP, than the 5Ds/sR offers a lot of advantages of the 5Ds.
It would be nice is Canon could match the D850 in areas other than MP which it has a clear lead.