Production of the Canon EOS 5DS and Canon EOS 5DS R has ended

[Chaitanya]

The very few times I used it (since last October), it worked fine. It even logged fine while being in my bag as a standalone unit!

That is good to hear, but I tend to use GPS unit in forests of western ghats where there have been times when even garmin units struggled to get signal.

 

[jeffa4444]

The 5DS has been my favourite portrait camera ever since I bought it and remains so. I could be tempted by the EOS-R5 depending how good the real world results are and then maybe the 5DS will be a back-up camera.

 

[tron]

I believe EOS R5 will have a very good sensor. The issue I see with the R5 however is the number of buttons which are less than EOS 5DIV and (now I have customized EOS R suitably) even less than EOS R (since I have programmed the 4 direction buttons and minimized the Mfn functionality to ISO and fps!). Another issue is the necessity to use EF to RF adaptors. For me this is super annoying. It will be tolerable for birding only if they make an excellent 1.4EF-RF teleconverter/adaptor. Also hoping that they will not have an AA filter which I honestly doubt since R5 will be Canon's general purpose body.

 

[dtaylor]

Two brilliant, high IQ cameras which are an absolute steal right now both on the used and gray markets. These cameras can run with low/mid tier MF backs in IQ while running circles around them in AF, speed, and responsiveness. They got pigeon holed as 'niche' cameras from day one which is unfortunate because they perform brilliantly in all scenarios including sports, action, wildlife, and yes, even low light. Aside from video...and these cameras were never meant to be cinema cameras...the only real complaints are 5 fps and the RAW buffer depth. Out of those two, I've personally only had an issue with the RAW buffer depth. 5 fps has been sufficient for me shooting surfing, volleyball, birding, airshows, etc.

The R5 will no doubt improve on base ISO DR, but will likely only improve slightly on high ISO. And it could be worse in terms of sharpness/detail depending on the AA filter. Here's hoping for a very weak or no AA filter on the R5. Either way, IMHO we're not going to see a substantial gain in IQ until we see Canon's next high resolution body. Anyone who can't afford the upcoming R5 but wants to compete when it comes to large, stunningly detailed prints simply has to pickup a used/gray 5Ds/sR.

I'm sad that there won't be a mark II version. I've said before that if Canon were to make a 5Ds mk II and a high resolution R with the same sensor/features, I would buy one of each. I still prefer OVF overall with a strong preference in certain situations. But I don't expect this given the state of the ILC market right now. No matter. My 5Ds isn't going any where. At current pricing it may even end up with a twin.

 

[tron]

Two brilliant, high IQ cameras which are an absolute steal right now both on the used and gray markets. These cameras can run with low/mid tier MF backs in IQ while running circles around them in AF, speed, and responsiveness. They got pigeon holed as 'niche' cameras from day one which is unfortunate because they perform brilliantly in all scenarios including sports, action, wildlife, and yes, even low light. Aside from video...and these cameras were never meant to be cinema cameras...the only real complaints are 5 fps and the RAW buffer depth. Out of those two, I've personally only had an issue with the RAW buffer depth. 5 fps has been sufficient for me shooting surfing, volleyball, birding, airshows, etc.

The R5 will no doubt improve on base ISO DR, but will likely only improve slightly on high ISO. And it could be worse in terms of sharpness/detail depending on the AA filter. Here's hoping for a very weak or no AA filter on the R5. Either way, IMHO we're not going to see a substantial gain in IQ until we see Canon's next high resolution body. Anyone who can't afford the upcoming R5 but wants to compete when it comes to large, stunningly detailed prints simply has to pickup a used/gray 5Ds/sR.

I'm sad that there won't be a mark II version. I've said before that if Canon were to make a 5Ds mk II and a high resolution R with the same sensor/features, I would buy one of each. I still prefer OVF overall with a strong preference in certain situations. But I don't expect this given the state of the ILC market right now. No matter. My 5Ds isn't going any where. At current pricing it may even end up with a twin.

Having gone the same way (2nd 5DsR) I can assure you that a second one will cure your 5Ds camera loneliness

By the way both my 5DsR cameras were bought brand new grey import. I didn't regret it. But that's me of course. YMMV.

EDIT: You are correct about buffer depth. I use the latest type Compact Flash (Sandisk Extreme Pro 150MB/sec write) and silent 3fps shooting to mitigate this issue as much as possible.

 

[Danglin52]

What's the evidence that the R5 images will be much better?

M6 Mark II sensor and years of development since 5ds/r. I am also guessing fab upgrades.

 

[AlanF]

M6 Mark II sensor and years of development since 5ds/r. I am also guessing fab upgrades.

I prefer the files from my 5DSR over those from my 90D, which has the same sensor as the M6 II. Have you compared them?

 

[Danglin52]

I prefer the files from my 5DSR over those from my 90D, which has the same sensor as the M6 II. Have you compared them?

Only compared to 5dIV. Remember, you are comparing a 32mp APS-C w/AA to a 50mp FF without AA. I think the more appropriate measure is improvement over the previous generation of APS-C sensors. It is more an indication of the improvement we should see in FF sensors.

 

[dtaylor]

Only compared to 5dIV. Remember, you are comparing a 32mp APS-C w/AA to a 50mp FF without AA. I think the more appropriate measure is improvement over the previous generation of APS-C sensors. It is more an indication of the improvement we should see in FF sensors.

The R5 is going to offer a significant improvement in base ISO DR because the 5Ds/sR are among the last Canon sensors to use the old architecture. But improvements to high ISO are unlikely to be large. Comparing the 90D to 80D (merely as an example) there's an improvement, but on the order of maybe 1/2 ev? Detail/sharpness are unlikely to improve upon the 5Ds/sR and may in fact be slightly worse depending on the R5's AA filter and whether or not it's 40mp or 45mp.

For stills I think the 5Ds/sR will remain quite competitive for years to come. We are well into diminishing returns when it comes to certain aspects of sensor IQ, so I don't expect a major leap to make any of today's cameras obsolete. Sensor improvements came much more slowly during the 2010's than they did in the 2000's.

Never the less the R5 will be significant for what the sensor tech provides in terms of video and DPAF, and for raising the bar for the 5D4 market segment. The R5 is not Canon's "high resolution" 5Ds/sR replacement yet it's going to come in at 40mp or more. It's going to be one heck of a camera.

 

[privatebydesign]

What's the evidence that the R5 images will be much better?

Of course it depends on your definition of 'better' but pretty much every Canon sensor architecture since the 5DS/r apart from the RP has been considered by most users to be 'better'. Certainly DR/shadow recovery/noise suppression/blotchyness is markedly better in the newer sensor architecture and I see no reason why Canon would top backwards on a mirrorless 5 series.

Having said that if your definition of image quality isn't heavily weighted to that DR/shadow recovery/noise suppression/blotchyness performance then I see o reason why an R5 would be considered 'better' than a 5DS/r.

 

[AlanF]

Of course it depends on your definition of 'better' but pretty much every Canon sensor architecture since the 5DS/r apart from the RP has been considered by most users to be 'better'. Certainly DR/shadow recovery/noise suppression/blotchyness is markedly better in the newer sensor architecture and I see no reason why Canon would top backwards on a mirrorless 5 series.

Having said that if your definition of image quality isn't heavily weighted to that DR/shadow recovery/noise suppression/blotchyness performance then I see o reason why an R5 would be considered 'better' than a 5DS/r.

That's correct. I mentioned earlier that we should expect an improvement in DR and shadow recovery at low iso. I tend to work at high iso where the 5DS/R are competitive with the best.

 

[privatebydesign]

That's correct. I mentioned earlier that we should expect an improvement in DR and shadow recovery at low iso. I tend to work at high iso where the 5DS/R are competitive with the best.

Yes but I think you would have to agree your particular use/definition of 'better' is rather specific and the majority of people would see the newer sensors as 'better' in many general shooting scenarios, certainly I paid $10,000 to upgrade to the newer generation of sensors because I do value the real tangible improvements in image quality at low iso.

 

[AlanF]

Yes but I think you would have to agree your particular use/definition of 'better' is rather specific and the majority of people would see the newer sensors as 'better' in many general shooting scenarios, certainly I paid $10,000 to upgrade to the newer generation of sensors because I do value the real tangible improvements in image quality at low iso.

All talk about the quality of the R5 sensor at this stage of our knowledge here is pure speculation. If it has a strong AA-filter it might even have poorer resolution than that of the 5DSR. Let’s wait and see what it’s like. The future will come soon enough.

 

[AlanF]

Only compared to 5dIV. Remember, you are comparing a 32mp APS-C w/AA to a 50mp FF without AA. I think the more appropriate measure is improvement over the previous generation of APS-C sensors. It is more an indication of the improvement we should see in FF sensors.

I am comparing similar sized crops from the 90D and 5DSR, not the full coverage from each. Both give better detail than the 5DIV.

 

[scyrene]

Let the legends begin. I won't be selling mine in a hurry.

I'm still hoping to trade mine in for (or at least towards) a 90D!

 

[dtaylor]

Yes but I think you would have to agree your particular use/definition of 'better' is rather specific and the majority of people would see the newer sensors as 'better' in many general shooting scenarios,

I would say DR improvements are rather specific, as opposed to resolution/sharpness/high ISO improvements. Unless you push shadows hard you don't see DR improvements. Not very many scenes call for such a push. But resolution/sharpness are always present, and high ISO is always present when shooting in low light which is common.

To each his own, but for general shooting scenarios I doubt you'll see a difference between an R5 and a 5Ds/sR unless it's a sharpness advantage to the latter. (Again hoping the AA filter is weak on the R5.)

 

[tron]

I'm still hoping to trade mine in for (or at least towards) a 90D!

So you are thinking of getting 90D by giving your 5DsR and some money difference?
This is a downgrade. It isn't as if you are trading in your 80D or 70D....

 

[scyrene]

So you are thinking of getting 90D by giving your 5DsR and some money difference?
This is a downgrade. It isn't as if you are trading in your 80D or 70D....

It's not a downgrade from my perspective. I stopped using the 5Ds because the file size is a bit much for my aged computer. The 90D gets me more pixels on target (for birds) with smaller file sizes and a higher fps. I'll still have a 5D3 for other stuff.

 

[tron]

It's not a downgrade from my perspective. I stopped using the 5Ds because the file size is a bit much for my aged computer. The 90D gets me more pixels on target (for birds) with smaller file sizes and a higher fps. I'll still have a 5D3 for other stuff.

I am satisfied with my 5DsR for birding but I realize that you have your reasons.Still, I think of it as a downgrade. Of course it is strictly my personal opinion and YMMV.

EDIT: I see you have an EOS 50D. Maybe that could be upgraded to 90D but I understand that maybe this will not get you much so it is much better to have it than get peanuts for it.

 

[tron]

Damn you Canon! Couldn't you make a 5DsR MkII and let people decide at least? Ok I realize marketing reasons (and possibly stupid concept reasons like mirrorless cameras are "in"). And of course they know best.
Sttill, I believe there is room for all. And I am no mirrorless hater. I have an EOS R and 4 RF lenses.