5DSR II?
- Thread starter j-nord
- Start date
Pretty much +1M_S said:
I'm not bothered by the 2 card slots being different but CFast would be better (but more expensive)
Better low light ISO and the inclusion of Wi-Fi, Bluetooth & GPS would b great
In same body as 5D MKIV and the improved 61 point AF (the current 5DS has better metering than the 5D MKIII & same as 5D MKIV)
Would NOT increase MP, files already too big for some subjects so I shoot some now M-Raw.
The 5DS gives great finely detailed images my only real gripe being low light performance but as a studio & tripod mounted landscape camera its amazing.
Upvote
0
Mikehit said:
Sony's compression seem to be a mixed bag these days:
- The A9 has thorny clauses and terms. If you want 20 fps, you are locked in to compressed files and the electronic shutter. Uncompressed RAW will knock you down to 12 fps, and the mechanical shutter knocks you all the way down to 5 fps.
- But their much less talked about A-mount SLT, the A99 II, only drops down to 10-11 fps in uncompressed RAW from what I've read. 42 x 10.5 is still a staggering throughput, on the order of 2x what the 5DS and 5D4 can deliver.
And I would be stunned if Nikon's D850 (rumored 46 MP x 8 fps) will come with compression fine print -- I'm not convinced the rumor is accurate (NR has corrected it twice this past week) but I doubt on release day Nikon will pull some fps / compression shenanigans when they do.
- A
Upvote
0
unfocused said:
Probably correct, but #2 may be an upscaled 90D sensor instead and #3 might not happen. With more serious video being left to the 5D4 [cough huge crop], one might argue the 5DS line is for stills only use and they may just go without AA on the 5DSR 2 and call it good.
But then again, Canon thinks we need a trio of tilt-shift lenses more than a great all-around 50mm prime, so what the hell do I know? :
- A
Upvote
0
unfocused said:
On the other hand, Canon have already stated that they have considered the 1 series body as a home for its high MP sensors. Seems to me that 1DXX with XXXMP sensor and high FPS(maybe in crop mode) is a certainty before the 2020 Olympics, also there are patents flying around with pellicle or variable transmittance mirrors.
We can live in hope! right??
Upvote
0
I guess paradise for you is a new set of Canon EF 50mm lenses:ahsanford said:unfocused said:
Probably correct, but #2 may be an upscaled 90D sensor instead and #3 might not happen. With more serious video being left to the 5D4 [cough huge crop], one might argue the 5DS line is for stills only use and they may just go without AA on the 5DSR 2 and call it good.
But then again, Canon thinks we need a trio of tilt-shift lenses more than a great all-around 50mm prime, so what the hell do I know? :
- A
50mm 1.4 II
50mm 1.4L
50mm 1.4L IS
50mm 1.2L II
oops I went too far. I was thinking about just 3 50m lenses ;D ;D ;D
Upvote
0
TedYork said:
I agree. Personally, I don't see what all the buzz is over mirrorless bodies. They have a few advantages and more disadvantages when compared with DSLR's for what I shoot. I keep up with the news and reviews with interest, but I'm very happy with my current gear and am not remotely tempted to replace my main camera with a different brand or mirrorless. I enjoy my M5 as a light-weight, occasional use camera, but I always grab my 5DsR and L lenses when I will be doing serious photography.
By the time Canon releases a 5DsR MkII (I'm guessing late 2019), I may be really to look at an upgrade if it has some features like tilt/flip touchscreen, DPAF, improved buffer performance and AF upgrades. I'm very happy with the IQ from my 5DsR and hope they don't increase the megapixals too much over the current 50.
Upvote
0
I tried a friend's Sony A9. While the EVF is better than that on my father's Canon superzoom, there is no way that I would be willing to give up the crisp, clear, live image through the OVF for such an EVF.
Eventually the EVF will be as clear as an OVF, and offer some advantages, but we're not there yet.
Eventually the EVF will be as clear as an OVF, and offer some advantages, but we're not there yet.
Upvote
0
TedYork said:
If Sony had not had such a fantastic sensor, would we have seen so many people changing systems? I very much doubt it: I think most would have said 'that's cool but not enough to make me change, I'll wait till Canon develop one'.
Upvote
0
My 5D mark II definitely needs to be replaced and a 5DS R II would be perfect for that. The huge resolution of the 5DS R would be so useful for all the cropping options it gives but I think I have to prioritise a speed improvement first and when I've used the 5DS R it doesn't feel any faster than my 5D II. If a 5DS R mk II could just push the overall speed and responsiveness up, even if it only kept the same sensor as the first version, that would be enough to push me to upgrade. I want to get many many years of use out of any camera I buy and a 5DS R with a speed boost would probably last me for the next decade.
I don't really care for the EVF because it's nicer to just use big the rear screen, but the EVF has its uses in bright light. Being able to preview your shot instead of review is great, and EVF lets you do that even with bright light behind you. It's a more relaxed way of working.
My main camera is a 5D mark II because I'm not one of those people who has to have the latest tech. I mostly use it with a Sigma 35mm. My next most used camera is a mirrorless Fujifilm X100T, which is a 35mm equivalent lens on an APS-C sensor. Honestly the two systems are pretty interchangeable but there are times when one is better than the other. The SLR is better when I know a photo will be viewed at a really high resolution, because that Sigma lens is so sharp, or when I need to make a strong professional first impression with a ''proper'' camera. The mirrorless is better when I need people to be comfortable or when I need to get the exposure right first time and won't have time to review and adjust.bholliman said:
I don't really care for the EVF because it's nicer to just use big the rear screen, but the EVF has its uses in bright light. Being able to preview your shot instead of review is great, and EVF lets you do that even with bright light behind you. It's a more relaxed way of working.
I think just as many people would change systems but they'd be a different type of people. Think about everyone who likes to use old lenses adapted to digital, the Sonys are the best bodies for that. I'd like to switch to Sony if I could afford the cost of totally switching brands, but that's not because of the sensor. For me it's the video options, the tilt screens, stabilisation for any lens you put on and eye detect AF.Mikehit said:
Upvote
0
Mikehit said:
I've been using a borrowed A7R3 for the last few days, and I get why it's so attractive. It's a camera that promises to take beautiful pictures, faithfully recording what you see in the viewfinder and not requiring you to do much else. In other words... a perfect tourist camera.
The sensor is fantastic, but it actually isn't much different from a 5D4 in practical terms -- or even, gasp, a 6D2. Don't let that 43 megapixels fool you -- there are precisely zero pictures that were incredible, that wouldn't also have been incredible with 30, or even 26 megapixels. You can't really deeply crop amazing pictures out of that 43 megapixels any more than you can out of 30 -- a small object in the distance might get a few more pixels, but it's still too small to make a good photo. People crow about the dynamic range; in fact, you can't really correct overexposures by very much (same as 5D4), and lifted shadows do not look anywhere near as good as correctly exposed photos to start with.
On the other hand, the Sony has a horrible flash system that is infinitely inferior to even Yongnuo's knockoff RTs, is incompatible with pattern-style AF illuminators, and has only focus-by-wire lenses, and is painful to hold for more than a couple of hours without a egregiously overpriced grip. Battery life is "fine", except it's not, because you'll easily go through two or three batteries if you need a full day of shooting. The finger dials feel cheap, and the shutter button is set so high up with a ridge around it that it's impossible to gently depress (so as to not add motion to a large lens). The weather sealing is a joke.
It's a camera that's first class in many respects, but falls really flat on some key things that I think that a lot of photographers would value.
So why is it so popular?
In large part, I think, because Sony caters to a segment of photography enthusiasts that don't care about the things that it's not good at so much. I mean, I have met many people with $10,000 in their camera bag, who don't own and never want to use a flash. There are people who think that telephoto ends with 400 + 1.4x. Or who would never consider using a tripod and a long exposure. Or use an ND or polarizing filter.
They are dismissive of the reasons for the size and bulk of a DSLR, and really just want something smaller that is easier to use and that is technically capable of producing professional-quality output.
Upvote
0
My Canon clock is ticking here. I've been waiting too long for a new body that at least comes close to the competitors and it's been only disappointments one after another.
I know it's about the photographer and not the equipment, but I simply refuse to pay top dollar for something that lags behind so bad in technology compared to the competition.
For years I've been waiting and my 5D3 is getting very old - rubbers are coming out everywhere, buttons are sticking, joystick fell out, shutter counter is over 200k. I love it and it has served me well, but it lacks many of the new features that would make my life easier.
When this 5D3 dies, I will need a new camera, and when that happens I'm hoping we will have at least a CR2 of a new 5D that can be somewhat on par with the A7III and D850.
I know it's about the photographer and not the equipment, but I simply refuse to pay top dollar for something that lags behind so bad in technology compared to the competition.
For years I've been waiting and my 5D3 is getting very old - rubbers are coming out everywhere, buttons are sticking, joystick fell out, shutter counter is over 200k. I love it and it has served me well, but it lacks many of the new features that would make my life easier.
When this 5D3 dies, I will need a new camera, and when that happens I'm hoping we will have at least a CR2 of a new 5D that can be somewhat on par with the A7III and D850.
Upvote
0
@lexaclarke: my 5DsR is lightyears ahead of the 5DII I had. Even the 6D was an upgrade. Comparing files from a wedding shoot over weekend, the focus with my 200/2.8 on the 5DsR is about 95%, that for the 6D is perhaps 30% even with the centre point. The 6D is now relegated to backup or when I must use two bodies simultaneously and then I mount a wideangle on it. And in my view, the 6D was a major step up on my 5DII. The delay in 5DsR image review is annoying, though.
@Talys: I have really appreciated two things with the 5DsR resolution. The first is how it made my 24-105/4 produce substantially sharper files. The 5DsR-24-105/4 combo produces visibly sharper images than my 6D-35/2IS combo. Second is the benefit of deep cropping. I had to take about 20 family group photos in the post-ceremony turmoil of a wedding in the weekend. I set the 5DsR on a tripod then took 4-5 photos of each group. I later made vertical crops of small groups 3-5 people with plenty of resolution remaining. A bit like a built-in APS camera.
@Talys: I have really appreciated two things with the 5DsR resolution. The first is how it made my 24-105/4 produce substantially sharper files. The 5DsR-24-105/4 combo produces visibly sharper images than my 6D-35/2IS combo. Second is the benefit of deep cropping. I had to take about 20 family group photos in the post-ceremony turmoil of a wedding in the weekend. I set the 5DsR on a tripod then took 4-5 photos of each group. I later made vertical crops of small groups 3-5 people with plenty of resolution remaining. A bit like a built-in APS camera.
Upvote
0
Talys said:
Thanks for sharing! Its good to see a balanced evaluation that isn't just based on specs and hearsay. The Sony hype-machine is certainly running at full speed in the photography media.
Mancubus said:
Please see the comments from Talys in the post prior to yours.
Upvote
0
Frodo said:
+1 I have used a 5D MkII', the 5DsR is a huge upgrade in every respect. Its kind of a 5D Mk3.5 with a 50mp sensor.
Frodo said:
Moving from a 5D MkIII and 6D to a 5DsR, I found the ability to crop to be substantial as well. This is especially useful for bird and wildlife images where you can't get close enough to fill the frame.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Mancubus said:
As someone who actually owns a 5DIV, I find this statement incomprehensible.
Some personal history: I owned a 5DIII and I now own a 7DII, 5DIV and 1DX II. Bought the 7DII because the 5DIII was inadequate for sports and at ISO 6400, the noise of the 7DII is not that much worse than the 5DIII.
Bought the 1DX II because I wanted the speed of a 7DII coupled with the superior noise and sensor performance of full frame.
Bought the 5DIV late last fall because I wanted a second full frame body with a quieter shutter, so I wouldn't have to keep switching lenses on the 1DX II.
I could not be much happier with the 5DIV. In fact, it is now my main camera and I use the 1Dx II almost exclusively for sports. There are a few quibbles (the lack of illuminated points is a real pain in dark settings and it would be nice if the metering were linked to the autofocus points), but overall it's now my main camera for shooting anything but sports and even with sports shooting, I find the 7 fps is usually adequate.
Some people think the difference between a 5DIII and 5DIV is negligible, I completely disagree. It's more like the difference between the 7D and 7DII -- which is huge. You might not find it in "features" but it's very evident in performance.
Upvote
0
