Is the Canon EOS 5DS series to be replaced by a mirrorless camera? [CR1]

Aug 21, 2018
109
73
#81
L


You have a point about re purposing older tech but to counter that the 5DS/R was new tech. Same for the 5Dmk4. Hopefully we’ll see some brand new sensor tech moving forward. I think they needed to go with the repurposed 5Dmk4 sensor on the first EOS R body in order to get something to market this year to stay relevant. They have a lot of patents including stacked sensors. True they don’t rush things to market and deliver every bell and whistle which seems frustrating but on the other hand if your a professional consumer your not beta testing for them like the first two iterations of the Sony prosumer bodies before they got the kinks out. While the specs sheet doesn’t look as exciting what you do get is a reliable camera with good ergonomics, simple to use, and a workhorse that doesn’t have anything added to it that doesn’t yet meet the engineers standards. For instance the IBIS, Canon has stated they didn’t include because of battery or was it overheating issues (one of those). Even if other manufacturers got it right (IBIS) I’m glad Canon didn’t add it in if it wasn’t yet up to their standards. They have stated it’s coming soon.
I do agree that Canon cameras tend to be rock solid reliable. And I don't doubt that has something to do with holding back on new tech until it meets their standards for reliability. Can't argue with that. But like you said, it can be frustrating waiting for a specific feature for much longer than with other brands. I'm also super impatient lol. I would rather pay more for them to expedite the development of new tech rather than wait for possibly years through their normal process. I could see many people disagreeing with that though lol.
 
Likes: Juangrande
Mar 6, 2017
6
0
#82
Right now IMO Canon was embarressed by Nikon when they introduced the Z6 and Z7. The R is a nice camera but it is outperformed by Nikon's offerings. An update to the 5Ds(R) would help restore Canon's leadership position,
I dunno, it depends on your needs. I personally have no use for video so I don’t even look at those specs and Canon has better native lenses out of the gate and in the near future. I think personally Canon has better ergonomics on the EOS R (I prefer a slightly larger body for comfort and control). The adapters on the Canon offer more options and benefits as well. I do wish Canon had a good IBIS system ready to go but I’m actually holding off for a higher MP body anyways and they have stated they are developing IBIS for future bodies.
 
Mar 6, 2017
6
0
#83
I do agree that Canon cameras tend to be rock solid reliable. And I don't doubt that has something to do with holding back on new tech until it meets their standards for reliability. Can't argue with that. But like you said, it can be frustrating waiting for a specific feature for much longer than with other brands. I'm also super impatient lol. I would rather pay more for them to expedite the development of new tech rather than wait for possibly years through their normal process. I could see many people disagreeing with that though lol.
I’m with you, I want it now.
 
Aug 21, 2018
109
73
#84
I dunno, it depends on your needs. I personally have no use for video so I don’t even look at those specs and Canon has better native lenses out of the gate and in the near future. I think personally Canon has better ergonomics on the EOS R (I prefer a slightly larger body for comfort and control). The adapters on the Canon offer more options and benefits as well. I do wish Canon had a good IBIS system ready to go but I’m actually holding off for a higher MP body anyways and they have stated they are developing IBIS for future bodies.
Yea I could see IBIS on future higher end bodies.

It is unfortunate about the video specs as somone who shoots a lot of video. It's particularly frustrating to see Canon - a company with a boatload of experience with video/cinema camera design, release a camera with lower video specs than a company that has little to no experience in video (nikon).
 
Nov 2, 2016
212
58
#85
Well, if Canon gets rid of the low-pass filter I will probably not buy a Canon again. I realize some folks prefer "razor sharp" images, but having at least one camera that has no low-pass filter, I strongly prefer the images from cameras that do. I prefer more realistic looking landscapes - not pics that seem artificially sharp. The human eye sees the large shapes and tends to ignore interior detail (Yes, they have done research on this) so it looks much more natural to see trees and not every single leaf - almost as if it is outlined. That's just my opiion, of course, but I have taken pics with my Olympus EM-1 (no filter) that go into the bin becaue of outlines that aren't really there and way too much detail that ruins some shots.
I don’t ever remember anyone else thinking like that before.
 
#86
I don’t ever remember anyone else thinking like that before.
I have observed that the unsharp mask sharpening in DPP gives very sharp pictures but also deletes natural transitions on the pixel level. Using the standard sharpening algorithm with sensible values (3 of 10) gives the best impression of textures and detail - maybe because it is a level where the enhancement brings the image closer to reality. Less makes fine detail soft - more makes it unnaturally sharp and the textures /detail are no longer natural.

So I am with dak723 that the right type and amount of sharpness counts, not the highest technical value of sharpness / microcontrast.
 
#87
This is generally what I expect Canon to do.
For sure, they could take the same sensor and pop it into the current 5D4 body for not a great deal of extra R&D outlay -> BUT canon has a new platform now (the R mount) - and migrating customers onto a new platform is a tricky business. A tasty new kickass high res sensor, exclusive to the 'R' mount might be just the ticket to get people to adopt the new mount.

I suspect that we won't see any more full frame DSLR's from Canon at all now.
 
Apr 3, 2018
112
32
Calgary
#88
This is generally what I expect Canon to do.
For sure, they could take the same sensor and pop it into the current 5D4 body for not a great deal of extra R&D outlay -> BUT canon has a new platform now (the R mount) - and migrating customers onto a new platform is a tricky business. A tasty new kickass high res sensor, exclusive to the 'R' mount might be just the ticket to get people to adopt the new mount.

I suspect that we won't see any more full frame DSLR's from Canon at all now.
On the contrary, I doubt that Canon will stop releasing new full frame DSLR's until the R lens line up is reasonably complete.

Or, Canon could also release more kick ass glass like the new RF 28-70 f2.
 
Aug 21, 2018
109
73
#89
On the contrary, I doubt that Canon will stop releasing new full frame DSLR's until the R lens line up is reasonably complete.

Or, Canon could also release more kick ass glass like the new RF 28-70 f2.
If they're serious about mirrorless (which they better be) then they should get some some high quality RF glass out there as quickly as possible. Not just release the first 4 lenses then a couple more each year. At this point, the RF optics are more of a reason to get the EOS R than any feature offered by the EOS R. Hopefully they fill out the RF lineup quickly.
 

scyrene

EOS 6D Mark II
Dec 4, 2013
2,262
117
UK
www.flickr.com
#92
lmao. it has nothing to do with you or your camera's ability to take good pics. It has everything to do with getting value for your investment. Just because I can afford the EOS R, doesn't mean it's the best way to spend $2300 considering I can get more performance for the money. Do I "need" the extra performance? Perhaps not, but why would I want LESS for MORE money?
You've made your feelings abundantly clear. I would hope everyone tries to get value for money, unless money is no object. You're the one who seems to care more about specs and the sensor in particular, from what I can tell, which makes me wonder, as getting the 5D4 sensor for nearly 1/3 less money seems like good value to me. There are other limitations of course, but that sounds pretty good value for the starting price (I'd never pay the RRP anyway, it's always better to wait).
 

dtaylor

EOS Rebel T7i
Jul 26, 2011
921
66
#93
Dpreview has also confirmed this banding. And, now that I own an A7III, I can testify that it does not have any such banding, despite having a PDAF sensor. The fact the EOS R has the banding is entirely due to Canon's relatively deficient engineering.
How's that weather sealing?
 

dtaylor

EOS Rebel T7i
Jul 26, 2011
921
66
#95
The most exciting piece of equipment I've used in many, many years is the Fujifilm X-T2. It has no AA (low-pass) filter in front of the sensor, dulling the image, and making it soft. This is critical to getting razor-sharp images right out of the camera. I think Canon should learn from this in the upcoming "Pro" mirrorless release. This central point CAN'T be emphasized enough. We can deal with possible moire in post. (BTW, this has never been an issue with my X-T2). This is coming from an ex 5DSr user.
I'm sorry, but if you were getting soft or dull images from a 5DsR you had a glass problem or a technique problem. Or maybe something was wrong with the body itself. Neither a 5Ds nor a 5DsR is going to lose a sharpness battle to an XT-2, assuming good glass on both. (Not to knock the XT-2 in any way.)

Also: if the XT-2 is X-Trans then it's not nearly as sensitive to moire as Bayer sensors.
 

dtaylor

EOS Rebel T7i
Jul 26, 2011
921
66
#96
Likes: nchoh
Jul 28, 2016
13
8
AZ
#97
Well, if Canon gets rid of the low-pass filter I will probably not buy a Canon again. I realize some folks prefer "razor sharp" images, but having at least one camera that has no low-pass filter, I strongly prefer the images from cameras that do. I prefer more realistic looking landscapes - not pics that seem artificially sharp. The human eye sees the large shapes and tends to ignore interior detail (Yes, they have done research on this) so it looks much more natural to see trees and not every single leaf - almost as if it is outlined. That's just my opiion, of course, but I have taken pics with my Olympus EM-1 (no filter) that go into the bin becaue of outlines that aren't really there and way too much detail that ruins some shots.
One of the most bizarre comments I've ever seen on here. I don't know what you're reviewing your pictures on, or how you're post processing them from camera, or what your eyesight is like, or what sort of vision processing is going on in your brain. (I do see "EOS 77D" under your profile name.) I can tell you that I shoot mostly landscapes with a 5DsR with RAW output, and then I do some sharpening in Adobe Camera Raw and then a final Smart Sharpening in PS. I'm using a 43 inch 4K Philips monitor, so unless someone's out there using a special 8K TV set of some sort as a monitor, what I'm using is about the most revealing possible PC monitor you can have. (And BTW, it shows oversharpened images easily, and they range from bad to hideous.)

And the final result in many images is like looking out your window, or standing there looking at the scene. There is no "too much detail" (???) to be found. (Oversharpening via software does NOT create detail, it creates unnatural artifacts.) Granted, like the vast majority of photogs colors are enhanced but still natural looking, and in general acheivable with optimum lighting on the scene. If there's haze at all I work to cut it (including via the smart sharpen step), but again the final result is natural and what you would see on a clear to very clear day.

I can understand people who shoot a lot patterns not wanting to deal with moire and thus wanting an AA filter, but "too much detail" is just much too bizarre. Your claim about what the human eye sees also sounds ridiculous, as it would be highy dependent on the viewer, how long the viewer was pondering the scene, and what elements of the scene would tend to catch the viewer's eye. Other than quick glances, I'm certain most viewers are noticing various detailed elements.
 
Likes: RobbieHat

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
1,893
142
Vancouver, BC
#98
Better than I need it to be, I'm sure.

How is it down there, scraping the bottom of the barrel?
Better than I need it to be, I'm sure.

How is it down there, scraping the bottom of the barrel?
You must not need weather sealing then, because the bottom weather sealing is non-existant :D

Which is fine; I rarely need weather sealing too, though I appreciate not having to worry about it if I'm caught out there and it starts raining or a big doggie decides to splash around a lot in a lake. But just sayin', the lack of weather sealing on the bottom makes it effectively not weather sealed at all if you use any inverted strap system like a back rapid, and arguably dicey with any clip system like Peak.
 
Feb 2, 2016
41
27
#99
I guess that 2020-2021 will tell us the future of Canon DSLR line and EF-line. As Canon has released updated (well not that updated...) versions of EF L-lenses they send a signal to customers that EF line (and by that DSLRs) are here to stay for years to come.

However - they also need to compete in the MILC segment -and by that release both new RF lines, but even more important also one or two high-end R-series cameras.

The question is - how many new/updated DSLRs will we see within the next 2 - 3 years. 7DmkII needs update for sure. The rest of EOS DSLR's is not that old given that Canon normal update rate for higher end cameras are 4 to 5 years. So new high end FF DSRLs with EF mount will probably be in 2020-21.
2019-2020 will be R-line / RF-mount build up i guess.
 
I'm sorry, but if you were getting soft or dull images from a 5DsR you had a glass problem or a technique problem. Or maybe something was wrong with the body itself. Neither a 5Ds nor a 5DsR is going to lose a sharpness battle to an XT-2, assuming good glass on both. (Not to knock the XT-2 in any way.)
Well... I suspect that it depends on how you are doing the test. The 5Ds should win the detail battle hands down, but detail and sharpness are not the same thing. Sharpness is generally a factor of technique, glass and post processing.