5D4 @ 30 MP X 7 fps --> enough upside from the 5DS for you?

[Jack Douglas]

As always your advice is much appreciated! I have various obstacles but the one that really bugs me is chronic migraine headaches. I could be so much better with the camera but regardless it gives me great pleasure and I'm simply having fun. 35k shots with the 6D thus far and a few are good.

Jack

 

[rrcphoto]

...
So #3 and #4, black singer with a black mic wearing black with a black background, and rapidly changing lighting. #5 and #6, black singer wearing very white suit with rapidly changing light.
...

#6 is the worst case. The point you want to focus on (face) is dark, the suit is bright and then you've got different color temperatures (or can have.) Spot is useless and to get it right requires manual exposure to not clip the suit whilst giving as much possible definition to color in the face - which sounds a lot like ETTR

spot for people is pretty useless in a multi-ethnic environment as well.

 

[StudentOfLight]

...
So #3 and #4, black singer with a black mic wearing black with a black background, and rapidly changing lighting. #5 and #6, black singer wearing very white suit with rapidly changing light.
...

#6 is the worst case. The point you want to focus on (face) is dark, the suit is bright and then you've got different color temperatures (or can have.) Spot is useless and to get it right requires manual exposure to not clip the suit whilst giving as much possible definition to color in the face - which sounds a lot like ETTR

spot for people is pretty useless in a multi-ethnic environment as well.

I use spot all the time. The reason spot is useful to me is that it is completely unambiguous. Spot metering is measuring what is inside the circle. No algo-rythmic-gym-mathstics going on in camera. (Sorry I had to throw in Olympic reference)

My approach is
1) Set white balance and proper exposure (easy with live view)
2) find in-field reference (e.g. partner's T-shirt, patch of dry grass, patch of dry sand etc...)
3) measure the reference,
4) check your reference patch periodically
5) adjust ISO or exposure controls(aperture/time value) if necessary

If I point my camera with evaluative metering at a landscape scene and it says +0.3, I really have no idea what the result means. If I point my spot meter at fully illuminated green grass (or blue sky perpendicular to the sun, or grey sand) and that says -0.7 I know exactly what that result means.

I love spot. It's beautifully simple.

 

[privatebydesign]

...
So #3 and #4, black singer with a black mic wearing black with a black background, and rapidly changing lighting. #5 and #6, black singer wearing very white suit with rapidly changing light.
...

#6 is the worst case. The point you want to focus on (face) is dark, the suit is bright and then you've got different color temperatures (or can have.) Spot is useless and to get it right requires manual exposure to not clip the suit whilst giving as much possible definition to color in the face - which sounds a lot like ETTR

spot for people is pretty useless in a multi-ethnic environment as well.

I use spot all the time. The reason spot is useful to me is that it is completely unambiguous. Spot metering is measuring what is inside the circle. No algo-rythmic-gym-mathstics going on in camera. (Sorry I had to throw in Olympic reference)

My approach is
1) Set white balance and proper exposure (easy with live view)
2) find in-field reference (e.g. partner's T-shirt, patch of dry grass, patch of dry sand etc...)
3) measure the reference,
4) check your reference patch periodically
5) adjust ISO or exposure controls(aperture/time value) if necessary

If I point my camera with evaluative metering at a landscape scene and it says +0.3, I really have no idea what the result means. If I point my spot meter at fully illuminated green grass (or blue sky perpendicular to the sun, or grey sand) and that says -0.7 I know exactly what that result means.

I love spot. It's beautifully simple.

That isn't what we were talking about though. We were specifically talking about AF point linked spot, where the metering area is not obvious. In your metering situations multi spot is a very powerful tool.

 

[ahsanford]

That isn't what we were talking about though. We were specifically talking about AF point linked spot, where the metering area is not obvious. In your metering situations multi spot is a very powerful tool.

My need is a pretty pedestrian one: put face or subject or object at rule of thirds positioning with fairly small DOF (say f/2, 35mm or 50mm, 5-7 feet away) under inconsistent/changing light conditions (use walking down a busy city street and popping into a few buildings as an example) and nail the shot on the first try.

Options (in my Aperture-priority means of shooting):

1) Decouple metering and focusing: Spot meter the face from center AF point --> AE lock --> recompose + focus --> shoot. Downside: I don't typically decouple focus and exposure when shooting on the run like this. I rarely use AE lock or back button AF, so in the odd instance I need it, I forget to rub my belly and pat my head and hit the button combo out of order.

2) Nail focus and spot meter using the center point --> hold shutter halfway down --> recompose --> shoot. Downside: Though simpler, this is obviously perilous for focusing with smaller DOF work -- you'd lose critical focus in the pan when shooting (say) f/2.8 or wider, so I'd stop down to f/4 or so and lose the point of the subject isolation I was gunning for. This is a cop out, albeit a practical one if you are pressed for time.

3) Put your subject in the center and accept your camera's limitations. Again, my cell phone says yes to this need where my 5D3 says "Sorry, please consider a 1DX". Fail.

4) Roll the dice that another metering mode or shooting fully manual will cope with the changing light conditions on a shot by shot basis. Sorry, unless I'm prowling an event with clear light and dark spots, compensating on the fly isn't going to work for me -- there's too much variability when I travel, when we're on walkabout, when we're at events, etc.

5) If I had spot metering at any AF point, it would be: move AF point to subject --> press shutter. That's easy peasy.

Method (5) easily trumps the others, provided the metering is accurate and I understand how wide that circle is.

- A

 

[Jack Douglas]

ahsanford, may I offer this. I'm new to all of these things and challenged more than you I'm sure and I'm getting close to 70. However, when I read carefully enough to fully appreciate the commentary, I determined to go with back button focus. It was driving me nuts that if I happened to hit the shutter button for various reasons, the 300 X2 could go off on a 2 second hunt for focus. Once I switched it has become so quickly intuitive to hit the back button for focus (only when I actually want focus) that I find it easier than all the other need to do items. Having AI servo or one-shot via the thumb is the cat's meow.

Just set it up and stick with it, you'll soon love it!

I too like the idea of having my selected focus spot being the one I will use to judge my exposure, not some removed from my attention, center region. Of course, I have a lot to learn and don't speak with any authority.

Jack

 

[ahsanford]

I too like the idea of having my selected focus spot being the one I will use to judge my exposure, not some removed from my attention, center region. Of course, I have a lot to learn and don't speak with any authority.

Jack

Fully appreciate the feedback. Back button AF -- which I have been politely clubbed over the head to start using for some time now -- is a do-it-all-the-time-or-don't-bother sort of proposition for me. I only see value in complicating my current shutter use for the odd specific thing I need (like what I listed), which is clearly the exception to the rule for me. I want to keep metering and shutter work linked for most of what I do -- it is simpler, faster, less things to screw up -- so I've resisted jumping in the pool for this need.

- A

 

[Jack Douglas]

I too like the idea of having my selected focus spot being the one I will use to judge my exposure, not some removed from my attention, center region. Of course, I have a lot to learn and don't speak with any authority.

Jack

Fully appreciate the feedback. Back button AF -- which I have been politely clubbed over the head to start using for some time now -- is a do-it-all-the-time-or-don't-bother sort of proposition for me. I only see value in complicating my current shutter use for the odd specific thing I need (like what I listed), which is clearly the exception to the rule for me. I want to keep metering and shutter work linked for most of what I do -- it is simpler, faster, less things to screw up -- so I've resisted jumping in the pool for this need.

- A

Club, club, club, exactly -Just set it up and stick with it, you'll soon love it!

However, it is a free country so I'm thankful you don't have to listen to me!

Jack

 

[retroreflection]

When someone asks for exposure linked to AF point, I think they are looking for that system where you can select any one of many AF points all over the frame, change their size, meter off of that area (size included), check the histogram, evaluate blown highlights, adjust if necessary, then take the shot.
The fact that all of that requires a mirrorless camera is no barrier to the desire. It might be a barrier to implementation, but so what.
Is there space for more effective exposure control in mirrorless cameras? While tough to write, I do think "get me as much light without blowing highlights, unless you have to" and other squishy principles could be programmed.
As long as a dslr has a separate sensor for exposure, the data for all of that fun just isn't available. Unless you want to put another full image sensor on that side of the mirror.

 

[ahsanford]

When someone asks for exposure linked to AF point, I think they are looking for that system where you can select any one of many AF points all over the frame, change their size, meter off of that area (size included), check the histogram, evaluate blown highlights, adjust if necessary, then take the shot.
The fact that all of that requires a mirrorless camera is no barrier to the desire. It might be a barrier to implementation, but so what.
Is there space for more effective exposure control in mirrorless cameras? While tough to write, I do think "get me as much light without blowing highlights, unless you have to" and other squishy principles could be programmed.
As long as a dslr has a separate sensor for exposure, the data for all of that fun just isn't available. Unless you want to put another full image sensor on that side of the mirror.

I don't need the kitchen sink. I don't need the mirrorless realtime histo super-tuner version of this. I just need that one feature (linking off-center AF to spot metering). Again, it's on a much cheaper SLR in another mount, the D5500. The implementation is undoubtedly vanilla/coarse/simplified, but it's there.

The problem is that if Canon offers this in the 5D4, I'll have a much harder time waiting out this cycle like I planned.

- A

 

[Mikehit]

When someone asks for exposure linked to AF point, I think they are looking for that system where you can select any one of many AF points all over the frame, change their size, meter off of that area (size included), check the histogram, evaluate blown highlights, adjust if necessary, then take the shot.
The fact that all of that requires a mirrorless camera is no barrier to the desire. It might be a barrier to implementation, but so what.
Is there space for more effective exposure control in mirrorless cameras? While tough to write, I do think "get me as much light without blowing highlights, unless you have to" and other squishy principles could be programmed.
As long as a dslr has a separate sensor for exposure, the data for all of that fun just isn't available. Unless you want to put another full image sensor on that side of the mirror.

I sometimes wonder how they managed before auto-metering.

 

[jeffa4444]

Boy this thread is sure more sane than the "other " one. Having shot with the 1D4 (10 fps) I'm not thrilled with a choice of 7 fps but I rationalize that BIF etc. are a smaller portion of what I've been doing. However, some of that hinges on the ownership of only a 6D for most of that time.

30 MP for reach limited cropping is what has my frustration level growing. It frustrates me that I'd still have only 20 MP going across to the 1DX II. I've compared a lot with my friend who shot 1DX, and 6D IQ held up pretty good when I compared our results from shooting together. So now to go from 20 to 20 is not thrilling me. Of course all the other things about the 1DX II, do.

Jack

I own a 6D (love it) and used a 1DX2 extensively for several days (rented from LensRentals). Apart from all the obvious hard feature upgrades the 1DX2 offers, the sensors of the 2 cameras are obviously identical in terms of resolution. I will say the new sensor tech on the DX2 did allow some latitude I didn't have in the 6D near the lower ISO range. Noise performance was a little better (maybe a stop or so) in the upper registers. This was just my personal observation. I didn't do any scientific tests to really dig in.. I didn't have the time. I'd guess the only reason to really get a DX2 over a 6D is if you need the speed and the AF capability (which I certainly do) and the additional video capabilities.

I too own a 6D and my biggest frustration with the camera is banding. Mainly blue skies, grey skies particularly shooting 24mm or wider and they are dam difficult to correct. The 5DS doesn't have this issue, the 760D doesn't have this issue, the G7 X (Sony sensor) doesn't have this issue, but Ive seen it on the 5D MKIII. So hopefully and given its cost the 1D MKII doesn't have it.

 

[Jack Douglas]

When someone asks for exposure linked to AF point, I think they are looking for that system where you can select any one of many AF points all over the frame, change their size, meter off of that area (size included), check the histogram, evaluate blown highlights, adjust if necessary, then take the shot.
The fact that all of that requires a mirrorless camera is no barrier to the desire. It might be a barrier to implementation, but so what.
Is there space for more effective exposure control in mirrorless cameras? While tough to write, I do think "get me as much light without blowing highlights, unless you have to" and other squishy principles could be programmed.
As long as a dslr has a separate sensor for exposure, the data for all of that fun just isn't available. Unless you want to put another full image sensor on that side of the mirror.

I sometimes wonder how they managed before auto-metering.

Well, going back to 1974 with my Canon F1, metering was easy. Just look around for something close to 18% grey equivalent and line up the circle to the meter needle. Now, focus OTOH was a bummer with even modest action. It's AF, even 6D level AF that is totally amazing coming into the DSLR realm.

I had no idea until a friend showed me what he was getting shooting BIF. Shortly thereafter I was off with him to the Camera store to buy my expensive Nikon D5100 and 70-300 with stabilization. And 3 years later I'm hooked after we both switched to Canon for the glass. In three years I've gone from shooting nothing basically (F1 embarrassment) to being on the verge of a 1DX II if the 5D IV doesn't blow me away.

So, given that Sept. 1 is my self imposed deadline, where are the specs we are waiting for?!

Jack

 

[tron]

When someone asks for exposure linked to AF point, I think they are looking for that system where you can select any one of many AF points all over the frame, change their size, meter off of that area (size included), check the histogram, evaluate blown highlights, adjust if necessary, then take the shot.
The fact that all of that requires a mirrorless camera is no barrier to the desire. It might be a barrier to implementation, but so what.
Is there space for more effective exposure control in mirrorless cameras? While tough to write, I do think "get me as much light without blowing highlights, unless you have to" and other squishy principles could be programmed.
As long as a dslr has a separate sensor for exposure, the data for all of that fun just isn't available. Unless you want to put another full image sensor on that side of the mirror.

I sometimes wonder how they managed before auto-metering.

Well, going back to 1974 with my Canon F1, metering was easy. Just look around for something close to 18% grey equivalent and line up the circle to the meter needle. Now, focus OTOH was a bummer with even modest action. It's AF, even 6D level AF that is totally amazing coming into the DSLR realm.

I had no idea until a friend showed me what he was getting shooting BIF. Shortly thereafter I was off with him to the Camera store to buy my expensive Nikon D5100 and 70-300 with stabilization. And 3 years later I'm hooked after we both switched to Canon for the glass. In three years I've gone from shooting nothing basically (F1 embarrassment) to being on the verge of a 1DX II if the 5D IV doesn't blow me away.

So, given that Sept. 1 is my self imposed deadline, where are the specs we are waiting for?!

Jack

Will you get blown away by specs or by IQ? If by specs then patience: 10 more days!
If by IQ you will have to wait past your deadline...

 

[Jack Douglas]

Tron, hmm I never thought of that. Actually I did and my decision is that if the specs and related samples are really impressive I'll wait, even if it kills me. It's tough to call because my heart is with the 1DX II being 1 series. However there is glass I'd like too.

Jack

 

[ahsanford]

Tron, hmm I never thought of that. Actually I did and my decision is that if the specs and related samples are really impressive I'll wait, even if it kills me. It's tough to call because my heart is with the 1DX II being 1 series. However there is glass I'd like too.

Jack

Tron's dead on.

If a feature-based decision (does it have X or not) is what tips the scales for you, you'll know on the day of release. But if you need SenScore / DXO / DPR / etc. nerdy little noise/banding comparisons or real world use reviews from TDP and others, it's going to be a while.

You probably won't get that until around the time of shipping as those reviewers prefer to look at production units.

- A

 

[Jack Douglas]

Well, at least I know I'm not alone in this regard!

Jack

 

[pwp]

Don't forget silent shutter. For many 5D users (wedding photographers in particular, but others as well) this is far more important than frames per second. I'm still having some adjustment shock from losing the 5D silent shutter with the 1Dx II. There is absolutely nothing silent about that shutter. Keeping the shutter silent in the 5D may limit just how fast the frame rate can be.

Since the 5DIII was released I was amazed how quickly I came to value the silent shutter mode. It gives you a lot more reach into sensitive situations. My 5DIII is set to silent as default, as is my 7DII. I value the silent shutter function far more than FPS rates.

Yesterday I had a good long test drive of the 1DXII. It's just amazing. I'll probably get one. It's value is far broader than it's blistering FPS numbers which I'd access half a dozen times a year, it's lack of silent shutter is regrettable but hardly a deal breaker when you look at the long, long list of attributes.

But sheer curiosity for what the 5DIV brings to the table has me holding off on the 1DXII just a little bit longer.

-pw

 

[Diko]

Until the DR and sample images come out nothing is 100% sure.

I would like to make a showcase of Canon 5Ds resolution capabilities in relation to usual print usage.
Since I am pretty sure that the s in 5Ds stands for Studio in this regard I will ignore ISO and fps for the sake of simplicity and as a reminder why it is not that good to compare a general purpose body with one dedicated mainly for studio usage with planned and controlled light.

Let alone that both are completely different generations both in sensor and CPU (if rumors are correct).
5Ds - DIGIC 6 (dual)
5Dm4 - DIGIC 7 (single)

Anyway I take it that for TV and web we hardly go over the 10 megapixels for the stills. "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast 8K argument at me." )) Ergo concentrating on Printing only:

According to this answer the good rule of thumbs is:

[width in pixels] / [print pixels per inch] = [print width in inches]
[height in pixels] / [print pixels per inch] = [print height in inches]

(Home Wall poster in landscape that you would go and look even from closer angle)
W = 8712 / 300 ppi = 29.04 in = 73.76 cm
H = 5813 / 300 ppi = 19.38 in = 49.22 cm

According to the following table (please note the dimensions are in portrait:

Size	Width x Height (cm)	Width x Height (in)
A0	84.1 x 118.9 cm	33.1 x 46.8 in
A1	59.4 x 84.1 cm	23.4 x 33.1 in
A2	42.0 x 59.4 cm	16.5 x 23.4 in
A3	29.7 x 42 cm	11.7 x 16.5 in

Canon 5Ds according to the standardpostersizes.com is moderatly good for a Bus Stop Poster – 40” x 60” ;-) It will be with average 150 dpi/ppi resolution though.

On the other hand a regular A3 would be:

W = 11.7 * 300 ppi = 3 510
H = 16.5 * 300 ppi = 4 950


That is 4 950 x 3 510 = 17 374 500 here you go 1Dx (m1).

On the other hand a regular A2 would be:

W = 16.5 * 300 ppi = 4 950
H = 23.4 * 300 ppi = 7 020

That is 7 020x 4 950 = 34 749 000 here Canon 5D m4 comes in short with 4 MP for the "best" quality.

And instead of a summary:
It all depends on each one of our own needs to adequately justify the choice, whereby we need to seperate the needs in commercial and personal categories.

 

[philllie1]

we have to wait how the cam will perform.
however from the specs the cam is not worth an upgrade for me. as an allround camera introduced in 2016 7fps also no not seem enough. i wonder, how this cam will "survive" 4 years on the market.
since canon deliberately holds the fps down... I hope, they will pay the price for it.