Canon EOS 5DS Production Models Out in the Wild

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Maybe this information was available elsewhere but I just noticed (apart from the fact I had already read that fps is not increased in crop mode...) So this is crippled intentionally for landscape and studio users and many 7DII users report AF problems. So it seems that there are no camera solutions when we are FL limited at least for birds... I am sticking with my 5D3s for now...

What a silly thing to say. If a camera's fps is limited by the processor then it can increase the fps in crop mode, if the fps are limited by the mirror and shutter mechanicals crop mode won't give a fps change, which is more "crippled"? I'd argure ff cameras that can increase fps in crop mode are "crippled" by their manufacturers cheapening down on the processors.

But yes, Canon have a target market for the 5DS that they think will be best served by the feature set, don't be disappointed if that doesn't include you or you can't devise a workaround to force it into your personal need, inevitably it wouldn't live up to your expectations anyway. The cost of ff 10fps mirror boxes and shutters is not insignificant and there is no reason for the actual target market to pay for them because you are too cheap to buy a crop camera for the jobs it is best suited to.

Even the 5D3 mirror box can handle more fps. Yeah a 10-12fps mirror box for FF is some money. But look at the cameras that have 6-7fps FF mirror boxes noways.

Also note that they made the crop mode only apply to JPGs not to RAW, so..... kinda seems intentional. That way not only is there zero chance for more fps, regardless of the mirrorbox, but the buffer will be poor for any RAW shooting too.

Anyway, whatever. If this is good for you it is, if not, not.

I think the 5D4 decisions are made by now anyway so it's probably to the point it's all pointless, either Canon will be on board for some users needs soon or it won't and that's that.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

No, it is not "crippled" intentionally to fit a profile - instead they defined the camera's niche by catering to its strengths.

Boy is that ever marketing speak. ;D
You should head straight to Madison Ave.

The software is limiting the ISO sensor output - And I'd make an educated guess that's primarily because of the image processing size. The camera can't apply as much NR and in-camera correction at the max output and still maintain a "Canon acceptable" frame rate for the buffer size - considering its not using C-Fast or UHS-III (as far as I can tell). There are only so many mbps you can push through the pipe at UHS-I class 3 (30mbps to be precise) where as a UHS III class 1 can achieve 220mpbs. C-Fast is as fast as many SATA SSD disks (up to 6gbps with current tech), because that's what it is only with a more rugged interface connector. But its rare, and C-Fast has the commensurate price to show it. By not using either of those formats, they limit themselves in A) data transfer rate from device to card and B) the amount of time for in-camera processing before it must pump the bits to the storage device to clear space for the next frame.

A lot of that doesn't make sense.

Also who was talking about high ISO JPGs here?

By the way, the 5DmIII sensor is one of the best sensors produced by Canon.

It's not one of their best for low ISO pattern noise and none of their sensors are top class for random read noise. 1Ds3, 40D, 6D,1DX,7D2,70D, etc. do better for that low ISO pattern noise.
A few like 1DX, 6D, 7D2, etc. do better (per sensor area for the APS-C, not overall) for high ISO DR and also for SNR (which only matters at pretty high ISO since a little difference isn't that big a deal at lower, mid, lower high ISO compared t 5D3 since that already is pretty solid). The color filter is pretty thin compared to any of the older Canons.

It's pretty good if you don't hit DR limits. Quite weak compared to the best around at low ISO if you do and even somewhat weak compared to the best of Canon in that regard, even the old 1Ds3 being better. And it's a bit worse than the best at high ISO DR from Canon or others.

 

[zlatko]

Anonymous Canon-bashing is par for the course on this forum. Read the forum critics enough and one might come to believe that Canon can't do anything right. We are led to believe that every product has something wrong with it, is intentionally crippled, designed by a marketing dept., won't sell very well, blah, blah. It's fun to contrast that with the fact that some of the best photographers on the planet choose to do their work with Canon, and do excellent work with Canon year after year, even with cameras that were similarly bashed.

 

[dolina]

The only thing i don't like about canon is that why announce something 6 months prior to release date? Unlike other companies that releases new products a few weeks before shipment waiting for months just feels wrong.

They probably do this to pre-empt any leaks relating to govt regulatory requirements.

 

[strykapose]

Would be nice to see a long exposure raw landscape file taken at iso 100, f/8 with any of the newer Canon lens at sunset or during the "blue hour"

 

[benperrin]

Would be nice to see a long exposure raw landscape file taken at iso 100, f/8 with any of the newer Canon lens at sunset or during the "blue hour"

Well as soon as I get mine that's exactly what I'll be doing. Most likely with the 16-35 f4.

 

[benperrin]

Anonymous Canon-bashing is par for the course on this forum. Read the forum critics enough and one might come to believe that Canon can't do anything right. We are led to believe that every product has something wrong with it, is intentionally crippled, designed by a marketing dept., won't sell very well, blah, blah. It's fun to contrast that with the fact that some of the best photographers on the planet choose to do their work with Canon, and do excellent work with Canon year after year, even with cameras that were similarly bashed.

It is quite amazing to see the bashing that does go on. One could easily come to the conclusion that Sony and Nikon have no problems with their lineup. After comparing the 5ds images to the d810 and the a7r I've come to the conclusion that it's mostly nonsense that people are talking. The d810 really isn't as far ahead as people on this forum promote. In fact I came to the conclusion that the 5ds is a better camera for me. And if people can't take good images with the 5ds the problem certainly isn't with the camera.

Someone on the forum earlier spoke the truth. It went something like this. People buy better cameras and use filters as a shortcut because they believe that photography is about having the best equipment. But whilst equipment can help photography is actually about capturing light and that takes years to master.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Anonymous Canon-bashing is par for the course on this forum. Read the forum critics enough and one might come to believe that Canon can't do anything right.

No.

(and for the record some of us anonymous bashers have, in the past, pushed tons of Canon sales, but unlike some, we call it as it is and don't get all fanboy and bend over backwards to defend anything and everything Canon has become; also for the record I don't think any of us say that Canon can't do anything right, I've still be praising lots of their lenses, UI for stills, etc. as have most others, heck I even defended the initial 24-70 II price)

 

[benperrin]

No.

(and for the record some of us anonymous bashers have, in the past, pushed tons of Canon sales, but unlike some, we call it as it is and don't get all fanboy and bend over backwards to defend anything and everything Canon has become; also for the record I don't think any of us say that Canon can't do anything right, I've still be praising lots of their lenses, UI for stills, etc. as have most others, heck I even defended the initial 24-70 II price)

But that's the problem. Lots of the people claiming that they are 'calling it as it is' are basically implying that Canon cameras are useless. Don't get me wrong I believe that Nikon has an advantage in shadow noise and dynamic range but these arguments have been exaggerated to the point where they try to make the Canon cameras sound awful. That is what is annoying. There are even people on this forum who don't even shoot Canon who just come here to troll us and tell us how bad Canon are in comparison to Sony/Nikon.

 

[Loswr]

Lots of the people claiming that they are 'calling it as it is' are basically implying that Canon cameras are useless. Don't get me wrong I believe that Nikon has an advantage in shadow noise and dynamic range but these arguments have been exaggerated to the point where they try to make the Canon cameras sound awful.

Just because someone says Canon delivers, "...poor, sub-par, unacceptable IQ," you think that's an exaggeration?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

No.

(and for the record some of us anonymous bashers have, in the past, pushed tons of Canon sales, but unlike some, we call it as it is and don't get all fanboy and bend over backwards to defend anything and everything Canon has become; also for the record I don't think any of us say that Canon can't do anything right, I've still be praising lots of their lenses, UI for stills, etc. as have most others, heck I even defended the initial 24-70 II price)

But that's the problem. Lots of the people claiming that they are 'calling it as it is' are basically implying that Canon cameras are useless. Don't get me wrong I believe that Nikon has an advantage in shadow noise and dynamic range but these arguments have been exaggerated to the point where they try to make the Canon cameras sound awful. That is what is annoying. There are even people on this forum who don't even shoot Canon who just come here to troll us and tell us how bad Canon are in comparison to Sony/Nikon.

Nobody has ever said the Canon bodies are basically all but useless.

And Canon is so resistant to bother, it takes some over the top talk if they are to ever bother to improve.

Canon has a great stills UI, awesome lenses so it would be nice if they bothered trying more for sensors and bodies again. I mean what Canon user would not want that? But they keep applauding whatever they do. Oh low ISO DR doesn't really ever matter so who cares? The 5Ds is meant for slow work so what do you expect for buffer, speed, video, don't be crazy! COme on ability to focus manually while shooting, zebras? THat's $20,000 stuff!!!! Come on 4k???? slog formats? hfps video? clean hdmi out? LOL!

But look, it's not crazy. D810 gives a cropped RAW so it gets AWESOME buffer performance with decent fps in one mode and then FF and tons of MP in another mode, you get both in one. The D810 and Sony and other stuff use sensors made on modern fabs so they can make use of patents to give better DR at low ISO. The new Sony A7R II is like 42MP AND will deliver 4k video with internal 100Mbps recording! and not just jaggy 4k video but in Super35 mode it will deliver not only zero line-skipping but oversampled 4k and slog2 and 120fps 720P and 60fps HD and clean HDMI output....

With Canon it's just "We [our MBAs not our engineers, most likely] see impossible."

If you want Canon to do well and stay on top why applaud when they act like fat cats sitting on top of the hill and not bothering with this and crippling that?

I'd way rather get a Canon than an A7R II, but at this point it seems I'm likely stuck going the A7R II route (or maybe Nikon D820?? maybe it gets the 4k and 42MP and some cropped mode RAW?). Get a top 42MP landscape camera with amazing DR and potentially great 4k video and can still use my Canon lenses.

Sure the Canon stuff is not terrible by any means and many will get it, but you can't but see how they are so into internal segment protection and ultra-conservative milking. It hasn't directly hurt them much for stills yet (although I'd bet they'd have almost wiped the others out now and in that sense it's maybe hurt them from not having doing crazy, crazy well already), but it's already hit them in DSLR video fairly hard.

Anyway whatever. It's not as big a deal this day as the Sony's can take adapters so even if you love the Canon glass you still have ways to get better video and landscape cameras and still use Canon glass (even if the SOny stuff is kinda drag and not so all around compared to a Canon body). (And Nikon is always there too if you can deal with the UI and lack of Canon glass.) So it's really pretty amazing times for video and photo people!

One could hope maybe, just maybe all the video features on the new stuff will finally scare Canon into having to deliver and maybe the Exmor might finally make them go to new sensors for 5D4? (but then why is the 5Ds still and older type sensor in some ways). Whatever, we'll see, at least there are some relative cost effective options to go elsewhere and even still use Canon glass now (even if yes, the Sony stuff is very compromised as a general camera in many other ways so you may still need to hold onto the old Canon body too and decide on your particular compromise for each shoot, but in many cases the compromise should not be too bad now).