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

Jul 31, 2018
297
110
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.
not necessarily. Possibly those updates were (mainly) done to make those white EF L lenses "fit for use on EOS R" with adapter. Since there are no size or IQ advantages for long teles with RF mount, Canon will bring those only later on as RF lenses and focus on shorter FL glass first.
 

zim

EOS 7D Mark II
Oct 18, 2011
1,863
53
not necessarily. Possibly those updates were (mainly) done to make those white EF L lenses "fit for use on EOS R" with adapter. Since there are no size or IQ advantages for long teles with RF mount, Canon will bring those only later on as RF lenses and focus on shorter FL glass first.
Very true about lenses but I suspect that the 7D and 1D lines will remain until the R line can equal or exceed what they can do. Of the two the 7D could be the first by putting in a real crop mode but that's not been Canon's style so far. (I don't think an APSC version of the R is necessary on that basis)
 
Nov 2, 2016
225
63
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.
I don’t think that’s exactly what he’s saying. He thinks the sensor can be too sharp. There’s a difference between critical sharpness in-camera, without manipulation, and post sharpness, using compute effects to accomplish the same thing. I’d much rather have it in the camera, off the sensor, than have to bring it back later. As far as I know, all RAW converters apply that small amount of sharpness to counteract the antialiasing filter over the sensor. No filter, and higher off the sensor sharpness means no need for that automatically applied sharpness correction.
 
I don’t think that’s exactly what he’s saying. He thinks the sensor can be too sharp. There’s a difference between critical sharpness in-camera, without manipulation, and post sharpness, using compute effects to accomplish the same thing. I’d much rather have it in the camera, off the sensor, than have to bring it back later. As far as I know, all RAW converters apply that small amount of sharpness to counteract the antialiasing filter over the sensor. No filter, and higher off the sensor sharpness means no need for that automatically applied sharpness correction.
If the sharpness of the non-AA-filtered sensor is "real" and produces realistic textures and transitions: I would take it without hestitation but ... converting the Bayer-pattern to an image which has the same count of RGB pixels like the sum of R-, G- and B-pixels is strong manipulation of data and cannot lead to a perfect image - with or without AA as far as I see these things.

About Bayer decoding: If you move the sharpness slider to zero in DPP the images are soft - I think Canon shows the antialiased and debayered image without any sharpness applied (RAW file as input) and the sharpness applied is very realistic at e.g. 3 or 4 (out of 10).

EDIT/add:
My general idea of good tools is "make them flexible" - a switchable AA filter would be great maybe by a standing ultrasonic wave with tuneable frequency to alter AA effects - turn the ultrasonic transducers off and you have a homogenous liquid (between sensor and an additional glas plate) which is the no-AA state!
The same for mirroless / mirror: Make a combo OVF-EVF system to be prepared for all situations ...
 
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.
The 5DSr should ideally be used with a tripod. if you can make that concession 100% of the time, god bless you. My point regarding the totally exciting, crisp and exciting look of the image coming from the X-T2 is not a sole observation of mine, but of many other thousands of photographers. This is why Fuji has become a juggernaut in the past couple years, just leap-frogging themselves at this point. I like Canon's build robustness, and great glass, but also like to pick up a camera, hand-hold, and take consistently great, crisp photos like the X-T2. If Canon were to have built-in IBIS to the 5DSr, I'd still have one. As far as the comment about being "too sharp", I have zero idea what this means. Too sharp optically does NOT exist. Too sharp in rendering software, does.
 
Likes: ken
For much of the photography I do with my 5DsR, a mirrorless version would be just fine. I usually use the camera on the tripod and mostly (with one important exception) work in live view mode. The latter point is important since I'm already dealing with the accelerated battery consumption that comes with live view usage. If a mirrorless 5DsR replacement is a bit smaller and lighter, that would be OK by me, too.

One concern is that I do use my 5DsR for wildlife photography, particularly to photography large migratory birds. So AF accuracy and 5DsR-level AF speed and consistency would be important.
 
Likes: RobbieHat
Jul 31, 2018
297
110
Although an APS-C EOS R is not impossible, I think Canon will keep EOS R line FF only. APS-C will be EOS M only, as soon as mirrorslappers (Rebels and anything xxD) are phased out. I am pretty sure there will be a 7D III (DSLR), but it'll be the last one.
 
Last edited:
Apr 3, 2018
139
51
Calgary
The 5DSr should ideally be used with a tripod. if you can make that concession 100% of the time, god bless you. My point regarding the totally exciting, crisp and exciting look of the image coming from the X-T2 is not a sole observation of mine, but of many other thousands of photographers. This is why Fuji has become a juggernaut in the past couple years, just leap-frogging themselves at this point. I like Canon's build robustness, and great glass, but also like to pick up a camera, hand-hold, and take consistently great, crisp photos like the X-T2. If Canon were to have built-in IBIS to the 5DSr, I'd still have one. As far as the comment about being "too sharp", I have zero idea what this means. Too sharp optically does NOT exist. Too sharp in rendering software, does.
"Too sharp" does exist because the pixels are laid out in grid pattern and the pixel density is still not high enough to hide the unnatural pattern.
 
Last edited:

baldermort

1DX Mark-II, 5DS-R, M6, D7 Mark-II
Oct 2, 2018
2
2
Would be happy to have a replacement for my 5DSR
Would not be happy if that was trying to write really slowly to an SD-Card. Dual C-Fast would be much nicer
Do not need the video function to be any better than say a Nokia 6110i phone
Would very much like lots of lovely dynamic range and MORE ISO
Have now managed to imprint the muscle memory when I switch from 5DSR to 1DX MKii, so willing to relearn where all the buttons and knobs and dials have moved to.
Am I being overly greedy when I ask if it might not be possible to get one from Santa rather than the Easter Bunnies?
 
Likes: RobbieHat

Act444

EOS Rebel T7i
May 4, 2011
933
61
About Bayer decoding: If you move the sharpness slider to zero in DPP the images are soft
Yup...most of the time too soft...however, in the case of the 5DS R, shoot it with the 85mm 1.4 IS at f4 and there is a surprising amount of detail and clarity in the RAW file even with no sharpening at all. By the time you get to 3.0, you are cutting-edge sharp, and by 3.5, you’re already introducing artifacts(!)...
 
Feb 24, 2016
4
4
God, I hope not. As a 5Ds user, that would suck. Having used both my 5Ds and a friend's Sony a7R III, I'm not convinced of the usability in many situations I shoot and for my shooting style. My opinion may change after a rental of the EOS R, but I'm not likely to see it at this point. I also have to differ with the opinion that it represents a "niche product for Canon". That would be like saying the Nikon D850 or the Sony a7R III are niche products. I have been a (digital) lifelong user of the 1D series cameras. It was only grudgingly that I bought the 5Ds because I needed the resolution, but vastly prefer the handling of the 1D series. That said, on a recent shoot, where I shot over 725GB, over half were made with the 5Ds. As I said, far from a niche product...
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
Yup...most of the time too soft...however, in the case of the 5DS R, shoot it with the 85mm 1.4 IS at f4 and there is a surprising amount of detail and clarity in the RAW file even with no sharpening at all. By the time you get to 3.0, you are cutting-edge sharp, and by 3.5, you’re already introducing artifacts(!)...
At least you're not introducing the infamous Fuji worms ;)
The Canon raw files are "honest" data, let's keep it that way.
 
Nov 2, 2016
225
63
If the sharpness of the non-AA-filtered sensor is "real" and produces realistic textures and transitions: I would take it without hestitation but ... converting the Bayer-pattern to an image which has the same count of RGB pixels like the sum of R-, G- and B-pixels is strong manipulation of data and cannot lead to a perfect image - with or without AA as far as I see these things.

About Bayer decoding: If you move the sharpness slider to zero in DPP the images are soft - I think Canon shows the antialiased and debayered image without any sharpness applied (RAW file as input) and the sharpness applied is very realistic at e.g. 3 or 4 (out of 10).

EDIT/add:
My general idea of good tools is "make them flexible" - a switchable AA filter would be great maybe by a standing ultrasonic wave with tuneable frequency to alter AA effects - turn the ultrasonic transducers off and you have a homogenous liquid (between sensor and an additional glas plate) which is the no-AA state!
The same for mirroless / mirror: Make a combo OVF-EVF system to be prepared for all situations ...
I agree with you. Because the photo sample sites are far apart, Bayer is needed. The antialiasing filter defocuses the image further to prevent that alias problem, so the situation is even worse.
 
Nov 2, 2016
225
63
"Too sharp" does exist because the pixels are laid out in grid pattern and the pixel density is still not high enough to hide the unnatural pattern.
What? I’ve examined thousands of images from digital sources in my lab over the years, and have never seen that problem.
 
Likes: Chris_BC
Jun 29, 2017
5
1
The circular polarizer and ND filter adapters is of limited interest to me as you would sill need a holder attached to the front of the lens to use ND grads.
There's always bracketing your exposure. Have you ever tried using a 14mm with filters on the front of the lens? Pain in the ass. Having either the CPL or ND at the rear will really help reduce flare and the weight of set up. Also if you have ND or CPL at the rear and a grad on the front you could have a slimmer holder meaning wider shots with limited vignette. As a landscape photographer it's exactly nd / cpl adapter that interest me the most out of all the features of the new R series capabilities.
 
Last edited:
Mar 7, 2014
1,054
2
Kabul
www.flickr.com
Would be a big mistake for Canon to remove the 5DS/R line. It remains their most unique DSLR product and offer. Move up to 80 or 120 MPIX they give DSLR another life line for several years to come.

This does not exclude a high MPIX mirrorless. Its just not a reason to close the 5DS/R line which btw kept its price much better than the 5DIV underlining a stable demand (even if I expect more 5DIVs have been sold).
 
Likes: Chris_BC
Nov 2, 2016
225
63
Would be a big mistake for Canon to remove the 5DS/R line. It remains their most unique DSLR product and offer. Move up to 80 or 120 MPIX they give DSLR another life line for several years to come.

This does not exclude a high MPIX mirrorless. Its just not a reason to close the 5DS/R line which btw kept its price much better than the 5DIV underlining a stable demand (even if I expect more 5DIVs have been sold).
Why would it matter if they instead offer a mirrorless with about the same feature set and an updated sensor? Wouldn’t that be better?
 
Oct 31, 2016
149
56
Better than I need it to be, I'm sure.

How is it down there, scraping the bottom of the barrel?
Not sure why you defend a company. It's fanboyism.

Both Sony & Canon have deficiency in their camera. Both of them have banding issues and it need to be fix.

Canon need to have better continuous eyeAF and IBIS, 4K, slow mo, improve sensor, dual card slot
Sony need better ergonomic, weather sealing, menu, color science, EVF, fully touch screen with articulating LCD

All FF mirrorless camera have compromises and everyone have different needs and deal breaker. Pick a camera that fit your needs and go out there and shoot.