Question about handheld shooting with 5Ds R

[AlanF]

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.

Thanks for that. There prophets of doom who find every excuse to be a naysayer and rubbish a camera without any real evidence or practical experience.

 

[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.

Thanks for that. There prophets of doom who find every excuse to be a naysayer and rubbish a camera without any real evidence or practical experience.

Well, the truth is after I bought the 5Ds R after a few months I did encounter the worst moire I have ever seen.

I did a photoshoot for family, it is the only kind of human photography I will do. I do it only because it was requested and of course I am the family member that has the expensive camera gear. In their eyes it qualifies me to be portraiture, wedding, senior and baby photographer. The son in law wore a shirt with very tiny dots, and a fabric that created wicked moire when I went to do PP.

The kicker here is that I did the photo shoot two months before I bought the 5Ds R. It took me 4 months before I got back to the files to PP. I did the shoot with my ancient non moire producing 5D II.

So the only explanation I have is that the 5Ds R moire infected files have somehow infected all of my old files from my 5D II. Maybe there is another explanation, I am not sure I will discover it.

 

[tron]

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.

Thanks for that. There prophets of doom who find every excuse to be a naysayer and rubbish a camera without any real evidence or practical experience.

Well, the truth is after I bought the 5Ds R after a few months I did encounter the worst moire I have ever seen.

I did a photoshoot for family, it is the only kind of human photography I will do. I do it only because it was requested and of course I am the family member that has the expensive camera gear. In their eyes it qualifies me to be portraiture, wedding, senior and baby photographer. The son in law wore a shirt with very tiny dots, and a fabric that created wicked moire when I went to do PP.

The kicker here is that I did the photo shoot two months before I bought the 5Ds R. It took me 4 months before I got back to the files to PP. I did the shoot with my ancient non moire producing 5D II.

So the only explanation I have is that the 5Ds R moire infected files have somehow infected all of my old files from my 5D II. Maybe there is another explanation, I am not sure I will discover it.

Was the infection restricted to moire or the 5DII files are now 50Mpixels? ;D

 

[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.

Thanks for that. There prophets of doom who find every excuse to be a naysayer and rubbish a camera without any real evidence or practical experience.

Well, the truth is after I bought the 5Ds R after a few months I did encounter the worst moire I have ever seen.

I did a photoshoot for family, it is the only kind of human photography I will do. I do it only because it was requested and of course I am the family member that has the expensive camera gear. In their eyes it qualifies me to be portraiture, wedding, senior and baby photographer. The son in law wore a shirt with very tiny dots, and a fabric that created wicked moire when I went to do PP.

The kicker here is that I did the photo shoot two months before I bought the 5Ds R. It took me 4 months before I got back to the files to PP. I did the shoot with my ancient non moire producing 5D II.

So the only explanation I have is that the 5Ds R moire infected files have somehow infected all of my old files from my 5D II. Maybe there is another explanation, I am not sure I will discover it.

Was the infection restricted to moire or the 5DII files are now 50Mpixels? ;D

Not yet just moire, if I put them in the same folder will this type of infection be passed on? I would like to have the additional resolution in my old pictures.

 

[Steve Todd]

Anyone concerned about using the 5Ds R for wildlife/BIF photography, should view the results Arthur Morris has achieved using his 5Ds R! www.birdsasart-blog.com

 

[takesome1]

Anyone concerned about using the 5Ds R for wildlife/BIF photography, should view the results Arthur Morris has achieved using his 5Ds R! www.birdsasart-blog.com

Not at all, I bought mine for wildlife.

But BIF, no its not a good choice IMO. I didn't read the article you posted, but I do not need to. FPS and Buffer are big negatives.

Six years ago or so, I bought my first 5D II and 500mm. On one of my outings I stopped to watch a pair of bald eagles and their young one. They were all roosting across the river when a Osprey came by. Like jet fighters the parents went at the Osprey, one straight on and the other circled around and came in under the tree line underneath. A few seconds in I hit the dreaded "FULL" and was limited to a few shots here and there. I missed out on the most critical parts, I got a few good pictures but I learned a valuable lesson. The slow camera is ok 99 percent of the time for BIF. But that other 1 percent may be the percent that counts. I moved to a 7D after that, wasn't satisfied at all, then three months later bought the 1D IV.

 

[Steve Todd]

If you haven't viewed Arthur's site, you really need to! The stuff he does on and off a tripod with his 5DS R is truly amazing...he was all about his 7D II until he stated using the 5DS R! Now his primary gear is the 5DS R and 1D X bodies. His body of work and awards speak for themselves!

 

[takesome1]

If you haven't viewed Arthur's site, you really need to! The stuff he does on and off a tripod with his 5DS R is truly amazing...he was all about his 7D II until he stated using the 5DS R! Now his primary gear is the 5DS R and 1D X bodies. His body of work and awards speak for themselves!

I wouldn't dispute the quality of his work.

I wouldn't dispute that he is in the business of selling gear, and over the years he has given a better report on certain gear than it deserved.

You mentioned BIF in the previous post, the samples I see on your link are not BIF.
I own the 5Ds R and it can do ok with BIF, but the shallow buffer and slow frame rate could cost you the shot of the year, or worse lifetime.

 

[AlanF]

If you haven't viewed Arthur's site, you really need to! The stuff he does on and off a tripod with his 5DS R is truly amazing...he was all about his 7D II until he stated using the 5DS R! Now his primary gear is the 5DS R and 1D X bodies. His body of work and awards speak for themselves!

I wouldn't dispute the quality of his work.

I wouldn't dispute that he is in the business of selling gear, and over the years he has given a better report on certain gear than it deserved.

You mentioned BIF in the previous post, the samples I see on your link are not BIF.
I own the 5Ds R and it can do ok with BIF, but the shallow buffer and slow frame rate could cost you the shot of the year, or worse lifetime.

He's a great photographer and knows how to capture birds. But he has to make a living and he needs you to click his links to B&H, Adorama etc and buy.

 

[Steve Todd]

My point was simply this, he's shot a ton of BIF with his 5DS R! And one can clearly see the great results of his efforts.
If you didn't see them, you didn't page through his blog pages or visit his main site, look at any of his books or really seen any of his great work! Please don't claim he doesn't do BIF just because you haven't looked! I was only trying to enlighten people who might not think the 5DS R is a good wildlife body. Looking at his work would certainly show them how one truly Pro BIF guy has gotten great results with that body!

 

[AlanF]

Direct cut-and-paste quote from http://www.birdsasart-blog.com/ 26 Feb 2016

"If…

If what you have been reading here about the 5DS R inspires you to purchase a 5DS R, please remember to use a BIRDS AS ART B&H affiliate link like this one: Canon EOS 5DS R DSLR. It is the best way to thank me for my efforts here on the blog."

The 5DS R is a great camera and Artie is a great bird photographer. He is also a great salesman!

 

[takesome1]

My point was simply this, he's shot a ton of BIF with his 5DS R! And one can clearly see the great results of his efforts.
If you didn't see them, you didn't page through his blog pages or visit his main site, look at any of his books or really seen any of his great work! Please don't claim he doesn't do BIF just because you haven't looked! I was only trying to enlighten people who might not think the 5DS R is a good wildlife body. Looking at his work would certainly show them how one truly Pro BIF guy has gotten great results with that body!

Who claimed he doesn't do BIF? He is a bird photographer, of course he does.

I would agree and believe the 5Ds R is a great wildlife body. I bought mine for that purpose. But not to shoot BIF.

I would agree that Arthur Morris has used it for BIF, I would believe that. I would also believe that Lebron James drives a Kia every once in a while. I would also believe that if you paid me I would use whatever tool you are paying me to promote.

 

[BAFFIONE]

i'm really worried about the real performance of my new canon 5ds, also with the top sharpening settings into style. i shot with all the conditions, low iso high iso, 1/125 or 1/200, with flash and no flash, but also with the delay of shutter, but the old canon 5d2 continue to give the best result. please look at the pic attached. i'm really worried. someone has suggestions? thanks

 

[AlanF]

Have you AFMAd your lens? My 5DSR is my sharpest camera, but I do AFMA my lenses carefully. Here's a shot of a snowy owl I took on Sunday, focussing on the beak. Unfortunately, I had the IS turned off, having just recalibrated the lens with FoCal.

 

[BAFFIONE]

i have a sigma 50 art and i have calibrated it, cause i found some errors in focusing, but the other 2 lenses are perfect and if i shot with 5d2 the images are perfect. sharpen and precise. not with 5ds. it's a bad story.
i dont' what to think..

 

[AlanF]

i have a sigma 50 art and i have calibrated it, cause i found some errors in focusing, but the other 2 lenses are perfect and if i shot with 5d2 the images are perfect. sharpen and precise. not with 5ds. it's a bad story.
i dont' what to think..

Did you do AFMA with the 5DS? It wasn't clear if you calibrated with the 5DII only.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

Focus looks a bit off to me - probably have to microadjust focus a bit backward. I have learned through experience with the 5DS cameras that even SLIGHT misfocus can have great implications on IQ (if you view full-size/crop heavily). All those pixels - while they're nice to have - there is a downside...Thankfully I find the AF to have a relatively high degree of consistency, but it does make shooting at super-wide apertures challenging at best.

I had to microadjust my 100 Macro on the 5DSR due to a slight front-focus. Actually, the annoying thing about it is that with this combo, each group of AF points seems to need a different AFMA setting - i.e., the center point was more or less OK at 0 but outer points were front-focusing a bit. Since I mostly use the outer points on this combo anyway, that's what I adjusted for (+8 did the trick). So the outer points are now dead-on, but there is backfocus with the center point group - and occasionally I'll forget this when shooting. :-\ But you KNOW when it's dead-on, because this thing is SHARP when it is...

 

[Sporgon]

i have a sigma 50 art and i have calibrated it, cause i found some errors in focusing, but the other 2 lenses are perfect and if i shot with 5d2 the images are perfect. sharpen and precise. not with 5ds. it's a bad story.
i dont' what to think..

Open your 5Ds CR.2 files at the same size as the 5DII - 5616 pixels long side.

It'll go a long way to solving your problem

 

[Jopa]

Try to focus via LV on a tripod (with IS = off), also maybe with zoom and 2s shutter delay. It's probably the most accurate focusing you can get. If it still sucks - maybe something wrong with the camera. The 5dsR sensor is crazy sharp, the 5ds one shouldn't be visually worse.

 

[photojoern.de]

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.

The full frame camera asks minimum speed 1/100 second to shoot hand held, and the APS-C camera asks minimum speed of 1/160 second.

Until here the previous post is correct. The thing is: pixel density of crop sensor and 5 DSR is similar. The 5 DS R get´s a larger field of view illuminated (full frame) than the cop sensor. On pixel level, this is similar. Solution to this is applied niecely into the 5 DS: there is an auto-iso shutter speed menue point where you can tell the camera to use a higher standard minimum shutter speed. So the camera would choose 1/200th in the above case. Then again, you are having a similar risk of camera shake as with the crop sensor.

So, long story told shortly: High MP resolution cameras are great. But to have tack sharp handheld photos, you will need a higher shutter speed (50% = 2 x quicker I would apply) or IS on your lens, compared to FF 21 MP cameras. Same applies by the way to lenses: you will start seeing smaller blurs that you previously not noticed with mediocre lenses. As well as your focussing - small errors start being visible at 1:1 view.