Does a 5Ds do anything better than an R5?

[LovePhotography]

I own a 5Ds (and other Canon DSLR bodies) and a bunch of EF glass. I realize there is a reason to keep the EF glass going forward, especially with lenses not yet out in RF format.
But, is there any reason to keep the 5Ds body or, (absent cost saving), just about any Canon DSLR body at this point?

 

[Maximilian]

But, is there any reason to keep the 5Ds body or, (absent cost saving), just about any Canon DSLR body at this point?

Two things come to my mind:

• OVF will always be faster But the gap will close with every iteration
  => So try out the EVF of the R5 if you like it
• Battery lasts longer with DSLR
• (Third: of course you'll have 5 MP more with the 5Ds. But I'd say that's negligible)

Apart from that, everything relevant is surely better with the R5:
AF, pixel performance (ISO, S/N), speed, etc. ...

... and a bunch of EF glass. I realize there is a reason to keep the EF glass going forward, especially with lenses not yet out in RF format. ...

If I were you, and if I had enough budget, I'd go for the R5.
I'd take a look at the EF lenses I use the most and if there are RF successors for them (e.g. the 70-200), I'd buy the RF lens.
For the rest, I'd keep the EF lenses, reducing the stress to my bank account.

Have fun with your GAS

 

[Joules]

(Third: of course you'll have 5 MP more with the 5Ds. But I'd say that's negligible)

I think it is worth noting that is only a paper spec difference, as the R5 has a superior AA filter resulting in more detail getting captured despite fewer MP.

To me it looks like the R5 even outperforms the 5Dsr in this direct comparison:

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.

www.dpreview.com

I think at some point there was a also a comparison posted on this forum demonstrating this more carefully. In any case, the 5Ds does not outperform the R5 in terms of actually captured resolution.

 

[Sporgon]

Yes ! Optical viewfinder, doesn’t drain your batteries or wallet as quickly as an R5. If you were being mugged and had to use the camera as a weapon I think the 5DS would be more effective than the R5. Beyond that though, even as a 5DS fan, I’d be pushed to suggest anything else.

 

[AlanF]

I think it is worth noting that is only a paper spec difference, as the R5 has a superior AA filter resulting in more detail getting captured despite fewer MP.

To me it looks like the R5 even outperforms the 5Dsr in this direct comparison:

Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review

Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.

www.dpreview.com

I think at some point there was a also a comparison posted on this forum demonstrating this more carefully. In any case, the 5Ds does not outperform the R5 in terms of actually captured resolution.

You are correct. Canon claimed the R5 outresolved the 5DSR and from what I have seen, it is very close. I am really happy with the IQ of both. The AF of the 5DS/R is actually very good for action (BIF) at f/5.6 or wider if you get the subject in the centre 9 points and you then pan. But, just point the R5 with tracking and full coverage and it will lock on wherever the subject is when the background isn't distracting and at 20 fps rather than 5 or so. One of the noticeable advantages for me is Canon bringing on to the market ultra lightweight telephoto lenses that AF at f/11 or narrower which are cheap and easy for me to carry. And, I can slap a 2x TC on the RF 100-500mm and focus fast and accurately at 1000mm f/14.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

Not having IBIS could in theory be an advantage in certain situations. For example without IBIS vignetting and sharpness fall-off should be equal in all four corners, while with IBIS it can be a little random, because the censor is not always in the centre of the image circle.

If you use a mechanical shutter, a mirrorless camera introduces an additional shutter shock, as the shutter is open while composing and if you take a photo, it has to close and then open again for the exposure. In a DSLR however the shutter is closed during composing unless you use Live View, which means one less movement before you expose the sensor. That shutter shock was mentioned in several reviews of mirrorless cameras.

As the sensor is used even for composing, it gets warm over time and that introduces some noise. However the noise levels will still be lower than in an older DSLR.

One big downside of mirrorless cameras I see is that camera manufacturers can "optimize" the image even in the viewfinder to compensate optical flaws of the lens. On a DSLR you get what you see. Canon does that cheating extensively with some of its lenses. You can't even turn that off.

In most situations I would not expect any "better" photos to come out of the R5 unless you shoot very demanding subjects like sports.

 

[koenkooi]

[…]

If you use a mechanical shutter, a mirrorless camera introduces an additional shutter shock, as the shutter is open while composing and if you take a photo, it has to close and then open again for the exposure.
[…]

That exactly what Electronic First Curtain Shutter (EFCS) is for: not having to use a physical curtain to start the exposure.

The EOS RP only has the second curtain installed, so it physically cannot close the curtain before the exposure.

 

[Skyscraperfan]

Electronic First Curtain Shutter could ruin your bokeh though, because the bokeh circles basically become half circles. That means that you lose one stop of bokeh. I do not like bokeh anyway, but some people love it. With EFCS your f/1.4 lens becomes a f/2 lens when it comes to bokeh.

 

[TAF]

I've had my R5 for about a year now, and think it is superb.

Find yourself a decent camera store and try an R5 out. Specifically, hold it and make certain it feels right in your hands.

Assuming it does, and you can afford it, buy yourself the R5, and sell the 5Ds and use the money for EF-R adapters for your EF lenses.

I have a mix of RF, EF, ZE, and FD(!)...and use them all.

My only 'complaint' with the R5 is when holding it, I do wish it had more body on the left side. Which is obviously a very person specific thing.

 

[Michael Clark]

One big downside of mirrorless cameras I see is that camera manufacturers can "optimize" the image even in the viewfinder to compensate optical flaws of the lens. On a DSLR you get what you see. Canon does that cheating extensively with some of its lenses. You can't even turn that off.

Canon is far from the only one doing that, too.

Pretty much all µ4/3 lenses/cameras have cheated that way from the beginning. Ditto for small, compact Sony E-mount lenses that aren't G/GM lenses the size of pickle jars. Also many compact Sigma/Tamron lenses offered only in MILC mounts.

 

[Sporgon]

The EOS RP only has the second curtain installed, so it physically cannot close the curtain before the exposure.

Good job given how crude the ‘thump whump’ sound of the RP’s shutter is. Canon clearly designed this to remind the user that, every time they fire the shutter, they didn’t stump up the cash for the R.

 

[bbeatty]

The 5DS/5DSR having ~10% more pixels makes a very small and subtle difference in resolution, but it is offset by the drastically better R5 performance in nearly every other way (IBIS, cleaner high ISO, FPS, autofocus, size, etc). When I compare the two side by side (I regularly use both of mine) it's hard to tell the difference immediately.

But when on a tripod, it's hard to beat the 50mp when you have the time to be slow and deliberate with composition.

 

[AlanF]

The 5DS/5DSR having ~10% more pixels makes a very small and subtle difference in resolution, but it is offset by the drastically better R5 performance in nearly every other way (IBIS, cleaner high ISO, FPS, autofocus, size, etc). When I compare the two side by side (I regularly use both of mine) it's hard to tell the difference immediately.

But when on a tripod, it's hard to beat the 50mp when you have the time to be slow and deliberate with composition.

Canon said on its release that the R5 outresolves the 5DSR, which I didn't believe. But it does slightly as measured on a site that does these things (optyczne.pl) and what I have found when testing the same lens on both - the extra 5 Mpx indeed makes no real difference.

 

[neuroanatomist]

The 5DS/5DSR having ~10% more pixels makes a very small and subtle difference in resolution, but it is offset by the drastically better R5 performance in nearly every other way (IBIS, cleaner high ISO, FPS, autofocus, size, etc). When I compare the two side by side (I regularly use both of mine) it's hard to tell the difference immediately.

But when on a tripod, it's hard to beat the 50mp when you have the time to be slow and deliberate with composition.

Can you empirically validate that? Not all pixels are equal, because the resolution achieved is critically dependent on the characteristics of the low pass filter (the 5DsR has one, it's just designed to cancel itself out). The '16-point' AA filters that Canon is now using are the reason, for example, that the 24 MP sensor of the R3 outresolves the 30 MP sensor in the 5DIV / EOS R.

FYI, about the R5 Canon has stated, "We have achieved the highest EOS resolution performance," with a footnote that indicates with Canon interchangeable-lens digital cameras that have been released as of July 8, 2020 (and thus includes the 5DsR). In other words, Canon disagrees with your conclusion.

 

[AlanF]

Can you empirically validate that? Not all pixels are equal, because the resolution achieved is critically dependent on the characteristics of the low pass filter (the 5DsR has one, it's just designed to cancel itself out). The '16-point' AA filters that Canon is now using are the reason, for example, that the 24 MP sensor of the R3 outresolves the 30 MP sensor in the 5DIV / EOS R.

FYI, about the R5 Canon has stated, "We have achieved the highest EOS resolution performance," with a footnote that indicates with Canon interchangeable-lens digital cameras that have been released as of July 8, 2020 (and thus includes the 5DsR). In other words, Canon disagrees with your conclusion.

I used to hate Canon’s using low pass filters because they did lower resolution. These new 16-point ones are remarkable, hardly any loss of resolution and I have never had Moire spoiling birds feathers.

 

[bbeatty]

Can you empirically validate that? Not all pixels are equal, because the resolution achieved is critically dependent on the characteristics of the low pass filter (the 5DsR has one, it's just designed to cancel itself out). The '16-point' AA filters that Canon is now using are the reason, for example, that the 24 MP sensor of the R3 outresolves the 30 MP sensor in the 5DIV / EOS R.

FYI, about the R5 Canon has stated, "We have achieved the highest EOS resolution performance," with a footnote that indicates with Canon interchangeable-lens digital cameras that have been released as of July 8, 2020 (and thus includes the 5DsR). In other words, Canon disagrees with your conclusion.

I hadn't heard that about the R3 vs. R, that's cool. I believe it too, the new AA filter delivers amazingly clear results.

I own both R5 and 5DSR, so naturally the first thing I did was compare the two! I get better results on the R5 95% of the time because of the better technology, but still love the 5DSR when I can slow down and really focus. I found the results to be the opposite based on my time shooting both side by side, but then again I don't have a vested marketing interest in a new product . Below shows a comparison at 100% (R5 left, 5DSR right, same exact lens/tripod/camera settings). In real world settings, it's hard to notice a huge difference.

 

[takesome1]

Can you empirically validate that? Not all pixels are equal, because the resolution achieved is critically dependent on the characteristics of the low pass filter (the 5DsR has one, it's just designed to cancel itself out). The '16-point' AA filters that Canon is now using are the reason, for example, that the 24 MP sensor of the R3 outresolves the 30 MP sensor in the 5DIV / EOS R.

FYI, about the R5 Canon has stated, "We have achieved the highest EOS resolution performance," with a footnote that indicates with Canon interchangeable-lens digital cameras that have been released as of July 8, 2020 (and thus includes the 5DsR). In other words, Canon disagrees with your conclusion.

Despite what Canon has said, I drew the same conclusion when comparing the R5 vs the 5DsR
"avoidingconcrete said:
The 5DS/5DSR having ~10% more pixels makes a very small and subtle difference in resolution,"

Despite that in almost all situations the other advantages of the R5 outweigh the 5DsR in situations which resolution is paramount.

 

[bergstrom]

Good job given how crude the ‘thump whump’ sound of the RP’s shutter is. Canon clearly designed this to remind the user that, every time they fire the shutter, they didn’t stump up the cash for the R.

The canon cripple hammer is actually INSTALLED in it.