6D or 5ds

[SUNDOG04]

I finally upgraded from my trusty 40D to a 6D. I did so because of the wider selection of wide angle lenses and the fact that the 40D is getting old and will not last forever. I do landscapes and other nature photography, but do not make huge prints. The 6D was a much more affordable camera for me although I was a little leery of the lack of auto-focus points. a 5D3 is a better camera, but just too much money for me. At any rate, I really, really like the 6D, it is a bit smaller and lighter than the 40D. It may lack focus points but the focusing is fast and accurate. I also like the simplicity. Now if I were to do birds in flight, I would want a more capable body, but I would also need a longer lens as well.

No doubt the 5DS is a fantastic camera, but will require excellent technique to bring out those qualities. You are the best one to decide if you will get better results with an upgrade and whether the upgrade is worth the cost. Unless you need an immediate upgrade to your images, I would say don't rush into it.

I am satisfied with my purchase but will enjoy reading the thoughts of others with the 5DS.

 

[Cariboucoach]

Hi there! I cannot understand why some people think that Canon's new 5DSr is worse than the 6D in terms of image noise. In fact, the 5DS, especially the 5DSr is at least equal or even slightly better when it comes to high ISO.

More pixels will record more detail, but how much more detail depends on the specifics of the scene (e.g. motion blur) and the sharpness of the lens. If the photo with more pixels has "enough" more detail than the photo with fewer pixels, then the application of NR to normalize the detail between the two photos may tip the noise advantage in favor of the photo with more pixels, even if the initial image file were more noisy.

Sensor efficiency does also play a big role and the new 5DS is also slightly better in this regard.

Sometimes, more pixels doesn't mean less image quality in terms of low light photography. If you like the specs of the 5DS and have enough money, go for it it's a great camera which is much more capable than some people might think. I just found it to be kind of too large and heavy for a travel FF camera. The 6D's just about right. I wish it would feature a tiltable screen but I will wait for a 6Da or 6D mk II.

Edit: ...and I hope for ISO 102400 LiveView

I went to Imaging Resource's "Compar0meter" at this link http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
and found the 6D was Much better at ISO 12,800 in terms of noise. But the 5Ds still had much more detail.

 

[mangobutter]

If you have to ask if you need the 5DS (or anything, really), you don't. The 6D is more than adequate and I'd argue even superior.

Unless you shoot in a studio FULL TIME or have obscene amounts of money, then skip the 5DS/R.

 

[super_newbie_pro]

Bad news for Canon ==> http://thenewcamera.com/canon-5ds-test-at-dxomark-lab/

Nikon and Sony are better

 

[jeffa4444]

Bad news for Canon ==> http://thenewcamera.com/canon-5ds-test-at-dxomark-lab/

Nikon and Sony are better

I know it is not stills but Ill give a high end video parallel. The Red Dragon has greater resolution than the Arri Alexa, the Arri Alexa natively has greater DR, they are both great cameras. However the success of the Arri Alexa dwarfs the Red Dragon but its not down to DR its down to the fact that colorimagery wise the Alexa looks more like film and its lower resolution actually helps preserve that.
More resolution is not always favourable particularly in video, sure for landscape photography and some table-top stills of products resolution to increase the almost 3D effect is great. But models dont want every blemish showing up and more resolution means more retouching there has to be a balance between three conflicting elements, resolution, DR and colorimagery. On that basis and given no one camera currently can give you everything it becomes horses for courses and that means Nikon and Sony are not always better.

 

[jeffa4444]

Should have added other points:-

If you want consistantly good sharp shots invest in a high quality, stable tripod and head and buy a cable release. (on the 6D you can use wi-fi and a phone app for remote release with or without live view). I would recommend Gitzo series 2 or 3 tripods or Really Right Stuff Versa series 2 or 3 and either the Arca-Swiss Z1 or the Really Right Stuff BH-55 (I have both heads and both are amazing).
A tip for landscape in windy conditions, pack a couple of aluminium spikes and tent type guide line tensioned with figure of 9 tighteners works wonders.

 

[AcutancePhotography]

Sure sounds like you really want one, but I don't hear anything to indicate that you need one at all.

sek

To be honest, when has that ever stopped any of us? ;D

If I were restricted to the camera I *need* I would have stayed with my 30D.

 

[jeffa4444]

Alex Nail has done a comparison with the 6D especially for landscape on his blog.

www.alexnail.com

 

[nc0b]

Sundog04. I am quite happy with my BIF results with my 6D and 400mm f/5.6 lens. None of my older bodies come close to the 6D in that respect. I have never used a 5D3 or 1D anything, so I am not commenting on them, which are likely better. I use the center focus point only and the 8.5 meter limit on the 400mm. If you want to get a start with BIF, and don't want to spend a fortune, you can do well with the old workhorse f/5.6.