New 5Ds and 5Ds R bodies can be had for around $1500 in the U.S. right now. They are 50MP.
OR I can wait a year or two--I should anyway--and get a proper mirrorless.
Upvote
0
New 5Ds and 5Ds R bodies can be had for around $1500 in the U.S. right now. They are 50MP.
OR I can wait a year or two--I should anyway--and get a proper mirrorless.
In the meantime you have no FF camera with the advantages that offers.
Doesn't the 5Ds/5Ds R have Live View as well as an optical viewfinder?
In the meantime you have no FF camera with the advantages that offers.
Doesn't the 5Ds/5Ds R have Live View as well as an optical viewfinder?
Go back, read what I wrote. I'm simply not ready for a full frame.
By contrast, I don't have ANY full frame camera right now, so I will probably just wait for a higher-res body as well, before taking the plunge. If I ever do. I do intend to get the M6 mk II as soon as I am convinced there won't be an M5 mk II...and that will be a 32MP camera. I can't quite see getting a full frame with fewer pixels than that now (though I don't necessarily want 80+ MP--40 or 50 would work out well I think).
I took your original statement to be saying that the reason you hadn't pulled the trigger on a FF body was because you were waiting for one with at least 50MP.
Same paragraph, earlier:
"I will probably just wait for a higher-res body as well, before taking the plunge. If I ever do."
Again, the latter half of that comment could lead one to think that 50 MP is what you consider "higher res."
I have several rolls of velvia, provia, and a few black and white films in 120 and 35mm I need to use up right now in fact.
Jack - what was your primary reason for switching to the M6 mk2?Gentlemen,
New here so a bit of background: using a camera for 70 years, switched to Canon some three years ago, a 70D. Currently take night HS football as the school sports photographer where the light is abysmal using the 5D4. That will change tomorrow.
Jjust got a M6 mark2 and at home tests reveal, to my old eyes, the ISO 12800 (which I have to use for the night games) noise is not greater than the 5d. So far, I really like the M6, light weight, can use any of my Canon glass, fast (it does actually burst at 14fps), and the EVF is, for me, a no sweat affair. Will shoot first game tomorrow and what will really help is the focus point lighting up when in focus. I tested this last night and it worked fine. If anyone is interested I will post a few images Sat.
Best Regards,
Jack Sciutti
Jack - what was your primary reason for switching to the M6 mk2?
Like you I am using a 5D mk4 to take sports pictures, often in very poor light. The lens I am using is a 100-400 F4.6-5.6L mk2
I do not have any focussing problems with this combination even when the light is very bad.
Frequently I allow the camera to go to ISO 32000 in order to achieve a fast enough shutter speed. Although the pictures are rather messy at this ISO it is better than missing the key moment in the game or lowering the shutter speed and ending up with blurry photos. Are you saying that the M6 mk2 is no better than a 5D mk4 in this respect so the main advantage to you is the smaller body size or do you think the results are better than anything you can achieve with the 5D mk4?
Gentlemen,
New here so a bit of background: using a camera for 70 years, switched to Canon some three years ago, a 70D. Currently take night HS football as the school sports photographer where the light is abysmal using the 5D4. That will change tomorrow.
Jjust got a M6 mark2 and at home tests reveal, to my old eyes, the ISO 12800 (which I have to use for the night games) noise is not greater than the 5d. So far, I really like the M6, light weight, can use any of my Canon glass, fast (it does actually burst at 14fps), and the EVF is, for me, a no sweat affair. Will shoot first game tomorrow and what will really help is the focus point lighting up when in focus. I tested this last night and it worked fine. If anyone is interested I will post a few images Sat.
Best Regards,
Jack Sciutti
Jack - what was your primary reason for switching to the M6 mk2?
Like you I am using a 5D mk4 to take sports pictures, often in very poor light. The lens I am using is a 100-400 F4.6-5.6L mk2
I do not have any focussing problems with this combination even when the light is very bad.
Gentlemen,
New here so a bit of background: using a camera for 70 years, switched to Canon some three years ago, a 70D. Currently take night HS football as the school sports photographer where the light is abysmal using the 5D4. That will change tomorrow.
Jjust got a M6 mark2 and at home tests reveal, to my old eyes, the ISO 12800 (which I have to use for the night games) noise is not greater than the 5d. So far, I really like the M6, light weight, can use any of my Canon glass, fast (it does actually burst at 14fps), and the EVF is, for me, a no sweat affair. Will shoot first game tomorrow and what will really help is the focus point lighting up when in focus. I tested this last night and it worked fine. If anyone is interested I will post a few images Sat.
Best Regards,
Jack Sciutti
Gentlemen,
New here so a bit of background: using a camera for 70 years, switched to Canon some three years ago, a 70D. Currently take night HS football as the school sports photographer where the light is abysmal using the 5D4. That will change tomorrow.
Jjust got a M6 mark2 and at home tests reveal, to my old eyes, the ISO 12800 (which I have to use for the night games) noise is not greater than the 5d. So far, I really like the M6, light weight, can use any of my Canon glass, fast (it does actually burst at 14fps), and the EVF is, for me, a no sweat affair. Will shoot first game tomorrow and what will really help is the focus point lighting up when in focus. I tested this last night and it worked fine. If anyone is interested I will post a few images Sat.
Best Regards,
Jack Sciutti
I wanted to try the lighted focus spot as on the 5d4 my old eyes can track a player just fine but the focus points (5) are hard to see. Also, the lighter weight appealed to me which means with the 70-200 2.8 I will use tonight the combination GC (center of gravity - I am an old pilot) will be forward so I'll use a mono-pod. My experience with the 5d has been that 12800 ISO is about as high as I would like to go and I do use auto ISO. I tried a test on a moving car with little ambient light Thursday and, indeed, I could see the lighted focus point (spot) just fine.Jack - what was your primary reason for switching to the M6 mk2?
Like you I am using a 5D mk4 to take sports pictures, often in very poor light. The lens I am using is a 100-400 F4.6-5.6L mk2
I do not have any focussing problems with this combination even when the light is very bad.
Frequently I allow the camera to go to ISO 32000 in order to achieve a fast enough shutter speed. Although the pictures are rather messy at this ISO it is better than missing the key moment in the game or lowering the shutter speed and ending up with blurry photos. Are you saying that the M6 mk2 is no better than a 5D mk4 in this respect so the main advantage to you is the smaller body size or do you think the results are better than anything you can achieve with the 5D mk4?
Michael, I agree so I will see how it goes. Testing thus far has been fine with the EVF and I may even try just the screen tonight at the game.I couldn't imagine working HS football sidelines with a viewfinder that is an external accessory sitting in the hot shoe.
I'm waiting for, um, probably Sony to introduce a mirrorless camera that you can watch NetFlix in the EVF and have a keypad on the back screen to text with....the youngun's will eat that model up!!!!!Once in my twenties when I could finally afford a single-lens reflex, it was so cool. I could look through the actual lens. Almost 50 years later, I am not ready to give that up. And, yes, I have small cameras that give me a TV picture on the screen on the back. My DSLRs can do that, too, when I wish. Sometimes you want to see things in person, and sometimes you want to watch TV. My newest camera even has a popup EVF for when the light is too bright to see the screen on the back. The diopter setting is too fussy to get the view very sharp. I doubt I'll find it usable for manual focusing. Luckily on that small a lens, focus is not that critical. If one eye of the subject is in focus, the other eye will almost surely be in focus.
Zeiss ZX1?I'm waiting for, um, probably Sony to introduce a mirrorless camera that you can watch NetFlix in the EVF and have a keypad on the back screen to text with....the youngun's will eat that model up!!!!!