More Samples Images from Canon EOS 5DS

[Canon Rumors Guy]

PhotographyBLOG has continued adding to their preview gallery of real world shots with the Canon EOS 5DS. This time they’ve decided to pair it with the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L.</p>
<blockquote><p>Last night we took the new 50-megapixel Canon EOS 5Ds with the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM lens to the financial City of London district to test out the 5Ds’s long exposure capabilities.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/canon_eos_5ds_canon_ef_17_40mm_photos/" target="_blank">You can view the gallery here</a></p>
<p>Shipping for the new high resolution cameras from Canon will begin this Sunday.</p>
<p>Canon EOS 5DS R $3899: <a href="http://adorama.evyy.net/c/60085/51926/1036?u=http://www.adorama.com/results/canonnewfeb" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1119027-REG/canon_0582c002_eos_5ds_r_dslr.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">B&H</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00T3ERPT8/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00T3ERPT8&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=X7P2IPISEXTZFLQ7" target="_blank">Amazon</a> | Canon EOS 5DS $3699: <a href="http://adorama.evyy.net/c/60085/51926/1036?u=http://www.adorama.com/results/canonnewfeb" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1119026-REG/canon_0581c002_eos_5ds_dslr_camera.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">B&H</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00T3ERPT8/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00T3ERPT8&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=C3LAZKJCU4IRBJUF" target="_blank">Amazon</a></p>

 

[lichtmalen]

And they still suck. Someone give this man a decent lens and a raw processing tutorial.

 

[niels123]

And they still suck. Someone give this man a decent lens and a raw processing tutorial.

;D
I have to agree with you

 

[lichtmalen]

And I would beg the CR guy to not advertise this page any more. Sample pics to and fro but these are really not good and don't show the potential. Only thing that can be done is acquire the raws and process them properly for yourself, cause what he shows there as jpgs is not in a single bit that what the camera can actually deliver if done right.

He is just clickbaiting because he's the first website owner that has a production model.

 

[Andyx01]

Is the point of these posts to show "Why you don't need 50MP" ?

I have yet to see a post on this site that shows off the advantages of a dense sensor.

Also thought I would throw this out there (Max optical resolution) :

Crop FF

f/2.8 96MP f/4.5
f/4.0 48MP f/6.4
f/5.6 24MP f/9.0
f/8.0 12MP f/12.7
f/11.3 6MP f/18
f/16 3MP f/25.4

 

[bereninga]

Why would this test be done on the 17-40mm? It should've been done at least on a more recent lens like the 16-35mm f4 or a zoom that's newer. Even a prime as well.

 

[jeffa4444]

Have to agree the EF17-40mm f4L was a poor lens choice the EF16-35mm f4L IS USM is a much better lens. Picture shows camera shake also.

 

[DomTomLondon]

And they still suck. Someone give this man a decent lens and a raw processing tutorial.

Wow, so much hate...

Um yeah... not everyone has got or can afford the new ultra wide angle lenses from Canon... Nothing wrong with the 17-40L when stopped down a bit!

 

[tomscott]

Regardless of the lens, I downloaded the raws and processed them myself, specifically 16 and 07.

7 because I wanted to see how the sky details would look after a bit of post processing and 16 because it was underexposed, lifting this 3 stops… handles it very well. Tones are great, and you can push these files really quite far, more than my 5DMKIII anyway.

Regardless of the lens this camera in my eyes looks great, add a sharper lens and the results will be amazing.

Im impressed tbh, great release by Canon.

 

[lichtmalen]

Wow, so much hate...

Um yeah... not everyone has got or can afford the new ultra wide angle lenses from Canon...

They are getting the new flagship camera from Canon to test before everyone else and probably are the first ones to show production model sample pictures online. Why would they even do that when they don't have the right lenses for such a job? Or better; why aren't they supplied with a set of decent lenses in the first place? I just don't get it.

 

[jonjt]

Is the point of these posts to show "Why you don't need 50MP" ?

I have yet to see a post on this site that shows off the advantages of a dense sensor.

Also thought I would throw this out there (Max optical resolution) :

Crop FF

f/2.8 96MP f/4.5
f/4.0 48MP f/6.4
f/5.6 24MP f/9.0
f/8.0 12MP f/12.7
f/11.3 6MP f/18
f/16 3MP f/25.4

Can you reformat that chart?

 

[lichtmalen]

Can you reformat that chart?

Resolution in the middle, crop aperture on the left, ff aperture on the right. More I would like to know what this is supposed to say and where it's from. I don't really understand the connection between aperture and high resolution, of course, at smaller apertures at some place diffraction will kick in, but please, I don't think that using f/16 lowers resolution to 3 megapixels on Crop sensors.

 

[bdunbar79]

And explain the calculations. Those calculations look a bit off to me as you narrow the aperture. Thanks.

 

[zlatko]

And they still suck. Someone give this man a decent lens and a raw processing tutorial.

Wow, so much hate...

Um yeah... not everyone has got or can afford the new ultra wide angle lenses from Canon... Nothing wrong with the 17-40L when stopped down a bit!

Such an inappropriate use of the word "hate". That lens is probably the worst of all of the current L lenses. People have been complaining about its corner sharpness ever since it was introduced in 2003. It's certainly not one of the best, and not one that's renowned for image quality. And here it is being used to show the image quality of the highest resolution FF DSLR ever.

 

[dolina]

Doesnt matter what the science says. If the customer demands or your require demands 50+MP then the 5DS/5DSR are cheapest way to do it.

 

[bdunbar79]

Can you reformat that chart?

Resolution in the middle, crop aperture on the left, ff aperture on the right. More I would like to know what this is supposed to say and where it's from. I don't really understand the connection between aperture and high resolution, of course, at smaller apertures at some place diffraction will kick in, but please, I don't think that using f/16 lowers resolution to 3 megapixels on Crop sensors.

Agreed. Calculations look WAY off as you narrow the aperture.

 

[lichtmalen]

And here it is being used to show the image quality of the highest resolution FF DSLR ever.

They don't have the really good Canon lenses, as he said somewhere in the comments. Apparently they're getting a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II soon, so expect more mediocre jpgs of random stuff.

 

[TeT]

Wow, so much hate...

Um yeah... not everyone has got or can afford the new ultra wide angle lenses from Canon...

They are getting the new flagship camera from Canon to test before everyone else and probably are the first ones to show production model sample pictures online. Why would they even do that when they don't have the right lenses for such a job? Or better; why aren't they supplied with a set of decent lenses in the first place? I just don't get it.

having a supposedly subpar lens does not explain those photos... It will be nice when a pros pro takes some shots with the 17 40 just to see what that lens will handle... or what the camera can actually do with that lens...

 

[Adelino]

I miss London so I like seeing the mediocre photos I agree it will be interesting to see what some great pros can do.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Wow, so much hate...

Um yeah... not everyone has got or can afford the new ultra wide angle lenses from Canon...

They are getting the new flagship camera from Canon to test before everyone else and probably are the first ones to show production model sample pictures online. Why would they even do that when they don't have the right lenses for such a job? Or better; why aren't they supplied with a set of decent lenses in the first place? I just don't get it.

I don't know, but it's been like that with basically every Canon release. Most of the early samples from the week or two before release are some sort of blurred, missed focus, missed exposure, in camera JPGS with NR to max and all waxy and nasty or one thing or another mess. And then people get them in their hands and the first samples from any old Joe on the street show off the camera 100x better in terms of what it can bring.