More Samples Images from Canon EOS 5DS

[R1-7D]

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

That's how I feel too.

 

[PureClassA]

These really have been some stinkers with a few decent ones thrown in. I'm not judging a thing til next week when mine arrives from Amazon and I go shot for shot with my 5D3

 

[KeithBreazeal]

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.

 

[lichtmalen]

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.

Really now? What lenses do you own? A 17-40 couldn't even deliver on the 5D Mark II or III, of course it won't be the best to get everything out of the 5Ds. The lenses you read in my signature should and they are definitely below 15K and cover quite a range of applications.

 

[KeithBreazeal]

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.

Really now? What lenses do you own? A 17-40 couldn't even deliver on the 5D Mark II or III, of course it won't be the best to get everything out of the 5Ds. The lenses you read in my signature should and they are definitely below 15K and cover quite a range of applications.

I have a 7D, SL-1, & 5D III, so a mish-mash of lenses. 14mm Rokinon, 16-28 f2.8 Tokina, Canon 10-22mm, 40mm pancake, Canon24-105L, Canon 70-200L IS 2.8, Canon 100-400L IS, 300L IS 2.8 and a couple other tid-bits.

 

[lichtmalen]

Well, okay. These could be a bit too low on the resolution end, maybe except of the 300. You wouldn't be very happy with the results on the new sensor, I think, it's quite demanding lens wise I would say, from what I have seen so far. I spent the last months rearranging my lenses for that reason and I think I'm good to go. It's no Otus but it should deliver.

 

[benperrin]

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.

You'll still see a resolution increase from your lenses. They just won't be quite as sharp as some of the modern L lenses but will still look better than the same lenses on a 5d3.

 

[mb66energy]

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.

I was in a similar dilemma: With
EF 2.8/24 old / 2.8 40 / 2.8 100 M USM non-IS / 2.0 100 / 70-200 4 non-IS / 5.6 400
I was not shure if they deliver on FF especially on a high res body.
After photographyblog's examples with the non-IS 100mm macro lens I am confident that that lens delivers - also 2.8 40, 2.0 100 and 5.6 400. The 70-200 4 non-IS fails on the 5D classic except above 135mm, the 2.8 24 is good enough but should be replaced for 5DS

Before you cancel your order: Can you send the body back without hassles after doing your own observations? Do some pre flight checks with the the-digital-picture tools of your lenses in comparison to alternatives - sometimes the older/simpler lenses have similar performance at optimum apertures.

Good luck for your path of decisions!

By the way: I ordered two 2nd hand 5D's of the first incarnation and I am really impressed what I can do with these 13 MPix cameras which is impossible with EOS M's 18 MPix sensor! Just 60 x 80 cm (24 x 32 inch) prints upscaled with DPP are very detailed from 40cm viewing distance ... if everything gone well during lighting, exposure, postprocessing!

 

[Bernard]

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.

You'll still see a resolution increase from your lenses. They just won't be quite as sharp as some of the modern L lenses but will still look better than the same lenses on a 5d3.

That's right. You will still get an improvement, regardless of what lens you use.

Those charts that calculate maximum theoretical resolution by aperture (based on diffraction) make some optimistic assumptions.

First, they assume a perfect sensor with no de-bayering. So a Foveon or Monochrom-type sensor.
Second, they assume that you will be viewing your pictures at 1:1. That means either a huge print viewed up close, or looking at a small portion of an image on a monitor.
Third, they assume that "everything else is perfect." No shake, no haze, no flare. Astro-photographers travel around the world to find these conditions!
Fourth, they assume that sharpness is the ultimate goal. That may be true if you consider photography to be a technical curiosity, but it's absurd if photography is used as a means of documentation or self-expression.

As I've told a few sharpness-obsessed photographers before: walk around the Louvre (or any other great art museum), and you'll notice that none of the pictures are really sharp! What do artists know that you don't?

 

[bdunbar79]

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.

Don't fall into that trap. That is NOT how things work. Crappy lens on 5D3 will you give a certain output resolution. That same crappy lens on the 5Ds will still give you more output resolution than on the 5D3. There's always something to gain. I encourage you not to cancel the preorder if you really want the camera.

 

[Andyx01]

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.

Crop MP 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

Calculator: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Diffraction effects are rather complicated as different wavelengths of light are affected by varying degrees.

While 3MP sounds low, it really isn't. The sharpest picture you have ever seen on a 1080P Television is just 2MP.

In other words you would need to shoot at a smaller aperature than f/16 on a crop sensor before the effects even begin to become visible.

Put another way, viewing an image shot at f/16 on a crop or f/25.4 on a FF would show no resolution loss when displayed on a 1080p HD Display.

Hope that helps.

 

[Andyx01]

Expanding the chart:

Crop MP FF

f/1.4 384MP f/2.25
f/2.0 192MP f/3.2
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
f/22.6 1.5MP f/36
f/32 750KP f/50.8 <- Close in resolution to your average playback screen (close to 1024x768)
f/45.2 375KP f/72 <- diffraction should begin to become visible on images displayed full-screen on 1024x768 displays.

Note: the width of this window is roughly 700 px. So an image shot at f/72 on a FF or f/45.2 on a Crop - re-sized to the width of this window - should not show any signs of resolution loss due to diffraction as a 700x400 image would be only 280KP.

 

[PureClassA]

You have plenty good stuff. They will all revolve better on the newer 50MP of a 5DS. May not resolve the sensor as well as some others, but you will still have a big jump.

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.

Really now? What lenses do you own? A 17-40 couldn't even deliver on the 5D Mark II or III, of course it won't be the best to get everything out of the 5Ds. The lenses you read in my signature should and they are definitely below 15K and cover quite a range of applications.

I have a 7D, SL-1, & 5D III, so a mish-mash of lenses. 14mm Rokinon, 16-28 f2.8 Tokina, Canon 10-22mm, 40mm pancake, Canon24-105L, Canon 70-200L IS 2.8, Canon 100-400L IS, 300L IS 2.8 and a couple other tid-bits.

 

[Andyx01]

I almost want to sell my 5D III and 1.4TC in favor of the 5Ds.

As far as resolving power of lenses. That information is already available - simply put the lens in question on an APS-C body and decide if the extra pixels on target add detail.

If your shooting faster than 2.8 - don't expect much of a difference without the best glass.
If your shooting slower than 8.0 - don't expect much of a difference on any glass.

 

[Diltiazem]

Some better samples here.

http://www.robertsealeblog.com/first-impressions-with-the-50-mp-canon-eos-5ds/

 

[AshtonNekolah]

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.

You should never listen to rumors or comments, take them all like a grain of salt, look at what you going to do with what you got, a better camera body don't mean better photos. Photos are subjects, so maybe you should focus more on that. people are creating remarkable images with iphones and camera phones, dont get so caught up and carried away from fans of a brand or people that have tons of money to show off what they can buy.

New don't mean better and guess what, I can handle what i have with my eyes closed or in the dark, no fiddling around. But use what you have to it's max and you will quickly learn you just could have more than you need.

According to what the talk is about the 5DS/R are made for tripods, come on if this is true what you got may have smaller MP but dont let that stop you from freezing time or freeze your flow.

And there is no such thing as a crappy L lens, or any lens for that matter, same hold true as for there is no best lens either, all this ranting and raving is all gimmick and marketing and people that just like to stir up this my god is better than your god stuff same rules apply with daily life, lenses will always out perform camera bodies potential, enjoy what you got and keep shooting the beauty that is out there.

 

[klickflip]

Yeah not surprised at all the trolling from the recent samples shot as look pretty bad amatures snaps and not processed properly.

So first impression they look a bit crap, but a couple of these last batch I believe actually tell quite a lot about the sensor , possibly the in cam jpeg processing . But I would normally assume the in cam jgp conversion applies NR and sharpening to produce mottled and over sharpened shots, but these look fairly neutral.

I did DL some of the raws and I'm very happily impressed by the smoothness of tonal graduations and reduction in noise in darks (even when pushed 2 stops) that we've had to put up with for so long. I feel it will produce images almost on par with the sony sensors maybe albeit a stop less DR which can be easily handled.

I felt the 5DIII was always a step down in image quality from the 5D II as suddenly everything went 'smirry' compared to a more precise rendering in 5DII especially when pushing processing to get some more modern look & colour shifts to images.

However I'll wait for some more reviews and samples and check what sonynikon may be coming up with in the 45-50 mp offerings , but I think my L and sigma art primes will produce some very nice quality images with it.

But generally feeling the question will be to keep 5D III as backup and general shooter when large files or ultimate quality is not required for jobs or sell to lessen the cost of a 5D Sr.

 

[te1973]

Canon gave the camera first to someone who only has the 17-40?
Says it all.

 

[dolina]

A lot of people still use a Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM and seeing the performance of a 2003 lens on a 2015 body would be helpful to a lot of long time photogs.