Question about handheld shooting with 5Ds R

[lichtmalen]

6400 is quality-wise quite identical to 5D Mark III. e.g. if you'd upsample a 5D Mark III shot at 6400 to the 50MP of the 5Ds, you wouldn't see much of a difference. This of course means that the 5Ds is still usable at high Iso and produces similar results to 5D Mark III at 6400. I have both, I have compared them.

 

[1982chris911]

6400 is quality-wise quite identical to 5D Mark III. e.g. if you'd upsample a 5D Mark III shot at 6400 to the 50MP of the 5Ds, you wouldn't see much of a difference. This of course means that the 5Ds is still usable at high Iso and produces similar results to 5D Mark III at 6400. I have both, I have compared them.

This more or less confirmes my impression from what i saw in the test online ... And well the ISO 12800 on the mk iii is really no longer usable for much besides snap shots

 

[I Simonius]

obviously best use a tripod but for those times when you can't (for whatever reason) it is worth noting that to help us with our perfect technique the shutter button requires much less pressure than the 5D2 (dunno about mk3) to fire. So much less in fact that after a week I still accidentally trigger the shutter.

Just love this camera

 

[K]

I would say that I'm about slightly above average on hand holding technique. I'm not steady as a rock, but I don't have the shakes either.

I recently shot an event with the 5DSR, here are my thoughts:


The "S" in the 5DS series means studio and they mean it. To get the most out of this camera, you really, truly need to be on a tripod. The same way it is with medium format. To make the most of the resolution, you have to be steady.

I did some hand-held comparisons with the 5DSR vs 6D. The practical results of the 5DSR hand held shots are no better than the 6D. In other words, you just have more resolution to "see" more blur/shake in the pixels when peeping; whereas, lower res cameras like the 6D...this is "masked" in the lower detail. Although, the truth is, even with lower MP cameras, if you properly light the subject and tripod mount the camera - the detail shoots way up....


While the 7D2 and 5DS have the same pixel density, they do not have the same pixel to image proportion. FF vs Crop matters not. The image projected onto the sensor by the lens, there is a different proportion in pixels. This is why the 5DSR show you more of the flaws in technique.


When the 5DS is mounted, it is nothing short of amazing the IQ. No, it isn't medium format. But it is remarkable for 35mm.


Advice:


Keep the 5DS for studio shots and landscape. And other "controlled" environment type shooting. The 5DS cameras are NOT event cameras. You give up FPS, which is more valuable, and gain very little with the resolution considering most if not all shots will be hand held. Only advantage is you can get a nice tight crop with it and have lots of pixels to enlarge IF you were steady enough. But I don't find that too valuable. The ISO is a little weak, but the 5DS has the newer Canon tech that is cleaner.


If you are going to shoot handheld almost all the time, get something else. Any 20-24MP camera is going to be good enough even for studio shots. Put that on a tripod, with good lighting in a controlled environment, and the results are stunning.

As expected, and said in past threads on the subject - the 5DS cameras deliver images of a quality and resolution not useful for anything short of serious landscape or commercial use. Makes no sense to get a 50MP image of something to then provide the client photos they'll view on a 1080 or 4K TV/Monitor (or cell phone), go up on a website, or digital picture frame. Even albums, "regular" 20-24MP cameras can print huge albums at high DPI no problem. So the output, the product of this camera is of no real advantage to those whose end result is low MP, scaled down image.


In short, the 5DS loses its main purpose when handheld - and all you end up with is 2-3x larger image files to deal with in post-processing.

 

[KeithBreazeal]

Interesting discussion by all. I went to Yosemite this last Saturday to shoot the "Fire Fall" at sunset. I got there early and went into tourist mode and just walked around to kill time. No tripod. just the 5DS and the old 24-105L.

If shutter speeds dropped below 1/250, I would choose live view to reduce vibrations in the longer focal lengths. Even though you are having to hold the camera away from you to frame, there is a notable improvement in IQ.

The new mirror drive is helping at the low speeds, but good holding techniques will always win out when using the viewfinder- as discussed earlier. After a few hours of hiking with the gear, it does get a bit more challenging.(at my age)

This is one of the handheld shots from that day. 1/250th at f8 using live view. There is no sharpening applied. I was on the edge of a muddy river bank in an uncomfortable position to get the low angle, so a bit challenging.

Click on the photo for the large file.

Yosemite Falls reflection 20 Feb 2016 6093 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

 

[K]

Interesting discussion by all. I went to Yosemite this last Saturday to shoot the "Fire Fall" at sunset. I got there early and went into tourist mode and just walked around to kill time. No tripod. just the 5DS and the old 24-105L.

If shutter speeds dropped below 1/250, I would choose live view to reduce vibrations in the longer focal lengths. Even though you are having to hold the camera away from you to frame, there is a notable improvement in IQ.

The new mirror drive is helping at the low speeds, but good holding techniques will always win out when using the viewfinder- as discussed earlier. After a few hours of hiking with the gear, it does get a bit more challenging.(at my age)

This is one of the handheld shots from that day. 1/250th at f8 using live view. There is no sharpening applied. I was on the edge of a muddy river bank in an uncomfortable position to get the low angle, so a bit challenging.

Click on the photo for the large file.

Yosemite Falls reflection 20 Feb 2016 6093 © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

This is a wonderful photo! Thank you for sharing. I very much appreciate these type of landscape shots. Realistic ones. Not these overly processed images that look like some scene out of Avatar.


Good info on the shutter speed. I found that I only saw a real edge over the 6D handheld with a shutter speed of 1/500. Then it was better than the 6D or 5D3 handheld. Under that, the advantage is lost.

 

[Ozarker]

Will be testing handheld today!!!!

Always fun to hold a new Canon isn't it? I get shivers even watching others do it. Nice camera!

 

[axtstern]

Always fun to hold a new Canon isn't it? I get shivers even watching others do it. Nice camera!

+1

 

[Larsskv]

I disagree strongly with those claiming the 5DS is a studio and landscape camera that need a tripod. I use my 5DS the same way I used the 6D and results are as good or usually better at lower shutter speeds. It's rare that I mount it on a tripod. I have never seen any signs of mirror slap vibration issues.

To get pixel level sharpness, I agree with those claiming that you have to use it as a crop camera, in terms of shutter speeds.

 

[takesome1]

It amazes me, their are many highly intelligent individuals on this forum who will debate endlessly and make observations about a camera they never had in their hand.

In the real world I pick my 5Ds R up and go about taking pictures just as I did with every other FF camera I have ever owned. Hand held the pictures come back sharper than from any other body I have ever owned. We can discuss small pixel and how shake impacts it, and make the point how it you "have to have" faster shutter speed but the argument is FOS.

In the real world if you want to take "full advantage" of the additional pixel density you have to use a tripod or fast shutter speed. But this was true with all the previous versions of FF. You do not have to have a tripod or faster shutter speed to see some of the benefit. But maybe my conclusion is based on my superior hand held technique, very doubtful.

 

[uri.raz]

Let's imagine Canon 5DSR and 7D Mark II, side by side, using the same 100mm lens, and enough distance to get the same framework in the camera viewfinder.

IMHO, this comparison is flawed, as the difference in distance will produce different photos due to the different perspective.

The proper comparison would be the two cameras side by side, the 5DSR using a 1.6x longer focal length, etc.

 

[bholliman]

I disagree strongly with those claiming the 5DS is a studio and landscape camera that need a tripod. I use my 5DS the same way I used the 6D and results are as good or usually better at lower shutter speeds. It's rare that I mount it on a tripod. I have never seen any signs of mirror slap vibration issues.

It amazes me, their are many highly intelligent individuals on this forum who will debate endlessly and make observations about a camera they never had in their hand.

In the real world I pick my 5Ds R up and go about taking pictures just as I did with every other FF camera I have ever owned. Hand held the pictures come back sharper than from any other body I have ever owned. We can discuss small pixel and how shake impacts it, and make the point how it you "have to have" faster shutter speed but the argument is FOS.

+1 I use my 5DsR handheld all the time with excellent results. Compared with my 6D or the 5D3 I recently sold, I am more aware of my shutter speed and try to maintain it above 2x focal length when possible. I'm a pixel peeper, so am looking for sharp pictures at 1:1. I've found I can get pixel level sharp pictures (maybe 80% of my shots) at shutter speeds at or even under 1x focal length with stationary subjects and good IS lenses (35/2 IS, 16-35/4, 70-200/2.8 II and 300/2.8 II).

I love using the 5DsR on a tripod, it's and excellent landscape/studio camera, but also can be a nice general purpose camera.

 

[jaayres20]

I would say that I'm about slightly above average on hand holding technique. I'm not steady as a rock, but I don't have the shakes either.

I recently shot an event with the 5DSR, here are my thoughts:


The "S" in the 5DS series means studio and they mean it. To get the most out of this camera, you really, truly need to be on a tripod. The same way it is with medium format. To make the most of the resolution, you have to be steady.

I did some hand-held comparisons with the 5DSR vs 6D. The practical results of the 5DSR hand held shots are no better than the 6D. In other words, you just have more resolution to "see" more blur/shake in the pixels when peeping; whereas, lower res cameras like the 6D...this is "masked" in the lower detail. Although, the truth is, even with lower MP cameras, if you properly light the subject and tripod mount the camera - the detail shoots way up....


While the 7D2 and 5DS have the same pixel density, they do not have the same pixel to image proportion. FF vs Crop matters not. The image projected onto the sensor by the lens, there is a different proportion in pixels. This is why the 5DSR show you more of the flaws in technique.


When the 5DS is mounted, it is nothing short of amazing the IQ. No, it isn't medium format. But it is remarkable for 35mm.


Advice:


Keep the 5DS for studio shots and landscape. And other "controlled" environment type shooting. The 5DS cameras are NOT event cameras. You give up FPS, which is more valuable, and gain very little with the resolution considering most if not all shots will be hand held. Only advantage is you can get a nice tight crop with it and have lots of pixels to enlarge IF you were steady enough. But I don't find that too valuable. The ISO is a little weak, but the 5DS has the newer Canon tech that is cleaner.


If you are going to shoot handheld almost all the time, get something else. Any 20-24MP camera is going to be good enough even for studio shots. Put that on a tripod, with good lighting in a controlled environment, and the results are stunning.

As expected, and said in past threads on the subject - the 5DS cameras deliver images of a quality and resolution not useful for anything short of serious landscape or commercial use. Makes no sense to get a 50MP image of something to then provide the client photos they'll view on a 1080 or 4K TV/Monitor (or cell phone), go up on a website, or digital picture frame. Even albums, "regular" 20-24MP cameras can print huge albums at high DPI no problem. So the output, the product of this camera is of no real advantage to those whose end result is low MP, scaled down image.


In short, the 5DS loses its main purpose when handheld - and all you end up with is 2-3x larger image files to deal with in post-processing.

I have had the exact opposite results actually. I a 1DX used to have a 5D3 and have use 6D a lot as well. I currently have the 5DSr and use it all of the time during weddings (including dark ceremony and reception locations. I often with slower shutter speeds down to 1/160 and sometimes 1/125 with my 200mm f/2. I can see a huge difference in resolution between the cameras, and have had almost no issues with camera shake. The 5DSr's files are gorgeous with nicely controlled noise along with amazing colors and obviously sharper images and more resolution.

 

[KeithBreazeal]

I disagree strongly with those claiming the 5DS is a studio and landscape camera that need a tripod. I use my 5DS the same way I used the 6D and results are as good or usually better at lower shutter speeds. It's rare that I mount it on a tripod. I have never seen any signs of mirror slap vibration issues.

It amazes me, their are many highly intelligent individuals on this forum who will debate endlessly and make observations about a camera they never had in their hand.

In the real world I pick my 5Ds R up and go about taking pictures just as I did with every other FF camera I have ever owned. Hand held the pictures come back sharper than from any other body I have ever owned. We can discuss small pixel and how shake impacts it, and make the point how it you "have to have" faster shutter speed but the argument is FOS.

+1 I use my 5DsR handheld all the time with excellent results. Compared with my 6D or the 5D3 I recently sold, I am more aware of my shutter speed and try to maintain it above 2x focal length when possible. I'm a pixel peeper, so am looking for sharp pictures at 1:1. I've found I can get pixel level sharp pictures (maybe 80% of my shots) at shutter speeds at or even under 1x focal length with stationary subjects and good IS lenses (35/2 IS, 16-35/4, 70-200/2.8 II and 300/2.8 II).

I love using the 5DsR on a tripod, it's and excellent landscape/studio camera, but also can be a nice general purpose camera.

In a moment of insanity, I decided to use the 5DS at the Reno Air Races. Out at the pylons, speeds reach 500 mph. I was totally disgusted with the results. At 100% crop, I couldn't see the fibers in his cap or his nose hairs.
Yah, you can crop 100% and have a great print but what's the point if it won't hold up under a 60 power microscope. You just know that some geek will bring a loop into the photo gallery and go past the ropes to pixel peep.

Thom Richard Hot Stuff screen shot 5172 web © Keith Breazeal by Keith Breazeal, on Flickr

 

[RGF]

Hello,

I just had a talk about the 5Ds R compared to the 7d MK II regarding the issue of needing IS on all lenses when using the 5DsR and the former not being a good camera for hand held shots.

As the pixel density and pixel size in both cameras (7d MK II and 5Ds R) is nearly identical (5Ds R having the larger sensor of course), I personally see no difference in shake and motion blur introduced to pictures and in the way I should use lenses on the 5Ds R compared to the 7d MK II.

This means if I get a sharp image in the 7d MKII with a non IS lens (e.g. 135mm f2L) using an exposure time of e.g. 1/200 sec. this same image should just be as sharp with the 5DsR. Or to say it differently my hand and the lens do NOT know if there is an APS-C or FF sensor behind the lens. Therefore the whole discussion if I need shorter exposure times with the 5Ds R to get sharp hand held pictures is completely pointless as the later is basically just a 7d MK II with a bigger sensor.

Is this assumption correct or do I have some fault in my thoughts???

Kind Regards CK

Sounds reasonable to me since the density of photo sites is nearly identical between the two bodies, only the 5DS R has larger sensor.

 

[AlanF]

When I posted that in an 80D thread that I wanted to see a Canon APS-C without the low-pass filter, there was a barrage of retorts that it wouldn't be any sharper without the low pass filter, the images would be ruined by Moire fringes, and, to prove it, TDP site mentioned Moire 30 odd times in its review of the 5DS r. So how come you users of the 5DS r, get sharp images and Moire is not running off your computer screens and falling like stardust over your shoes?

 

[Refurb7]

I disagree strongly with those claiming the 5DS is a studio and landscape camera that need a tripod. I use my 5DS the same way I used the 6D and results are as good or usually better at lower shutter speeds. It's rare that I mount it on a tripod. I have never seen any signs of mirror slap vibration issues.

It amazes me, their are many highly intelligent individuals on this forum who will debate endlessly and make observations about a camera they never had in their hand.

In the real world I pick my 5Ds R up and go about taking pictures just as I did with every other FF camera I have ever owned. Hand held the pictures come back sharper than from any other body I have ever owned. We can discuss small pixel and how shake impacts it, and make the point how it you "have to have" faster shutter speed but the argument is FOS.

+1 I use my 5DsR handheld all the time with excellent results. Compared with my 6D or the 5D3 I recently sold, I am more aware of my shutter speed and try to maintain it above 2x focal length when possible. I'm a pixel peeper, so am looking for sharp pictures at 1:1. I've found I can get pixel level sharp pictures (maybe 80% of my shots) at shutter speeds at or even under 1x focal length with stationary subjects and good IS lenses (35/2 IS, 16-35/4, 70-200/2.8 II and 300/2.8 II).

I love using the 5DsR on a tripod, it's and excellent landscape/studio camera, but also can be a nice general purpose camera.

+1 more. I don't have a 5DsR, but resolution has never made a difference to how I shoot any camera, going from 4mp to 22mp. Cameras shake the same, regardless of resolution. For decades I have seen renowned pros shooting medium format without a tripod. Handheld vs. tripod has nothing to do with capture resolution. It has to do with a bunch of other factors instead.

 

[bholliman]

When I posted that in an 80D thread that I wanted to see a Canon APS-C without the low-pass filter, there was a barrage of retorts that it wouldn't be any sharper without the low pass filter, the images would be ruined by Moire fringes, and, to prove it, TDP site mentioned Moire 30 odd times in its review of the 5DS r. So how come you users of the 5DS r, get sharp images and Moire is not running off your computer screens and falling like stardust over your shoes?

I've only noticed slight moire a few times in over 5k frames shot on my 5DsR. But, I'm mostly shooting landscapes and nature so recurring patterns are not very common.

 

[Eldar]

When I posted that in an 80D thread that I wanted to see a Canon APS-C without the low-pass filter, there was a barrage of retorts that it wouldn't be any sharper without the low pass filter, the images would be ruined by Moire fringes, and, to prove it, TDP site mentioned Moire 30 odd times in its review of the 5DS r. So how come you users of the 5DS r, get sharp images and Moire is not running off your computer screens and falling like stardust over your shoes?

I've only noticed slight moire a few times in over 5k frames shot on my 5DsR. But, I'm mostly shooting landscapes and nature so recurring patterns are not very common.

I have about 15k frames on mine, primarily nature, birds and wildlife, but also people in various dresses and architecture. I have to date not seen a single case of Moiré.

 

[takesome1]

So how come you users of the 5DS r, get sharp images and Moire is not running off your computer screens and falling like stardust over your shoes?

Because it is not there. Maybe moire is to Canon what rare side effects are to the pharmacitical industry.
Where you had a 1 chance in 10000 of taking a picture with moire when using a 5 D III, the 5Ds R might have a chance of 1 in 5000. That is twice as bad!!

So far I have seen it one time, it appeared in a shot that had a metal cage in the background. It was awful, it forced me to make a few adjustments in LR to make it go away. I have been lucky, 10,000 frames or more and only one example.

I live in fear that some day I may have to make another adjustment in LR to make moire go away. I can barely sleep at night because of worry.