Review: Canon EOS 5DS for Bird Photography

[Canon Rumors]

Canadian bird photographer Glenn Bartley has completed his review of the Canon EOS 5DS. As a bird photographer, Glenn requires a select featureset to maximize his number of keepers, especially with small avian creatures. As far as I know, Glenn shoots a lot with APS-C cameras such as the EOS 7D Mark II.</p>
<p>From Glenn:</p>
<blockquote><p>The 5DS has raised the bar and become the new king of high megapixel cameras. It is an impressive camera to be sure! Photographers whose primary and ultimate concern is resolution need look no further than the 5DS. If your photography workflow includes the best glass that money can buy, a very sturdy tripod, good technique, a solid post processing workflow and a fast computer this just might be the camera for you!</p>
<p>The reality is that most of us simply do not need 50.6 megapixels. Aside from the resolution increase the 5DS doesn’t really bring enough to the table to “force” 5D Mark III users to upgrade. Those of us wildlife photographers focussed on fast moving and small subjects would be wise to look past the incredible resolution of this camera to the more practical capabilities that it lacks (such as frame rate and buffer size). <a href="http://www.glennbartley.com/Canon5DSSetupandReview.html" target="_blank">Read the full review</a></p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Canon EOS 5DS: <a href="http://www.adorama.com/ICA5DS.html?kbid=64393" 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 Photo</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> Canon EOS 5DS R: <a href="http://www.adorama.com/ICA5DSR.html?kbid=64393" 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/DFF/d10-v21-t1-x604095" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/1TtqViz" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></p>

 

[pedro]

In the not too distant future I can imagine a scenario where cameras are mirrorless, have electronic shutters and can transfer data at a higher rate enabling much faster frame rates. If this was the case in the 5DS, and if the viewfinder actually zoomed in when you switched from 1.0x to 1.6x crop mode, then I could see myself getting excited about this camera. Until that day comes I will be sticking with my 7D Mark II for the great majority of my own personal wildlife photography.

As I stated in the introduction I am a very practical photographer. The primary question for me is whether this new camera will allow me to capture better images than I could before. In the case of the 5DS I would have to say that in most cases the answer is “no”! That is not to say that this is the case for everyone. I do think that most photographers should ask themselves this important question before taking the plunge into the tempting world of pixel peeping and ultra-high megapixel cameras.

Canon might have "seen it coming" that there is a new MP race going on. But this time, it is different than let's say 5 years ago. Because of dramatic sensor architeture changes over at Sony... Did Canon miss the momentum, as they cannot deliever the same sensor tech in their high MP monster...Bartley's conclusion seem quite telling. What are the birders opinions on this forum, in comparison to the recently announced A7IIR? I am not a label basher, just like to hear some commments by those with expertise.

 

[sanj]

I think I will use my 5d3 a bit longer.

 

[Freddie]

As I consider myself both a birder and landscape photographer, his summation seems quite reasonable to me. I'm selling a 1D MK IV as it has already been replaced by the 7D MK II. I may be selling a 5D MK III for the 5Ds-r. In looking through what I consider to be the more successful images in my meager portfolio, the impression is that I can do all I wish to do with the 7D MK II and the 5Ds-r. They would not back each other up in most cases like the 5D MK III and 1D MK IV could if, necessary. It would be a real dichotomy but workable since I don't shoot for clients.

 

[ahsanford]

Canon might have "seen it coming" that there is a new MP race going on. But this time, it is different than let's say 5 years ago. Because of dramatic sensor architeture changes over at Sony... Did Canon miss the momentum, as they cannot deliever the same sensor tech in their high MP monster...Bartley's conclusion seem quite telling. What are the birders opinions on this forum, in comparison to the recently announced A7IIR? I am not a label basher, just like to hear some commments by those with expertise.

Formally, I am not a birder, but I thought a comment was in order.

There's so much more to a camera than the sensor. If you want to shoot wildlife with a Sony rig, I do wish you luck -- those rigs are spectacularly lacking on a host of things other than IQ: low burst rate, low AF speed, questionable AF tracking, wonky ergonomics, limited native lens selection, low battery life, etc.

(Keep in mind the a7R II promises a lot of improvements, but I do not think one new model will hit all of the above metrics out of the park.)

I've often joked that using a better sensored-camera that is not intended for action/sports/wildlife will have you miss the moment the fish goes in the bird's mouth, but your miss will be gorgeously rendered.

I'm not bashing mirrorless per se, but action/sports/wildlife/birding is the most demanding segment of photography, and I think Sony needs a number of generations of improvements in areas other than the sensor to stack up to Canon and Nikon in that arena. That said, I welcome the actual birders on this forum to share their thoughts on Canon falling behind Sony w.r.t. sensors vs. birding.

- A

 

[dolina]

Would have been nice if the 7D Mark II had the AA cancellation or exclusion of the AA filter.

 

[applecider]

Glenn I'm pretty sure you post and read here so here are a couple of things that I'd take issue with from your conclusions.
First the issue of computer I think should be null since it is external to camera. Ok that may be minor, but...

Needing better lenses is not true as shown by roger Cialis at lens rentals, even meh lenses perform better with higher megapixel camera. And what birder has a bunch of inferior great whites?

Lastly the sensor density and shake issue needs to studied scientifically between the 7d2 and 5ds as the pixels per area really aren't much different. 1.6^2x20MP is 51.6 MP so same density. This implies that the shake factor is the same between 7d2 and 5ds.

It also looks like you came into the review with a preconception that the crop sensor reach camera was going to be better for image quality. No question that the bullets on target are more, oh I mean frame rate, I grant you that.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The review confirms what I would expect.

The camera is aimed at studio and landscape photographers. There is no doubt that it can be used for many other purposes, but it will be less than optimum, or money is being spent on the body that might do more good for a lens.

It certainly does not make $$ sense to purchase a expensive camera and then crop the image to 7D MK II dimensions. If its main purpose is landscape or studio use, then certainly use it for birds if the occasion pops up!

 

[ahsanford]

Needing better lenses is not true as shown by roger Cialis at lens rentals, even meh lenses perform better with higher megapixel camera. And what birder has a bunch of inferior great whites?

Roger Cialis, that's awesome.

Here's the link to the data applecider brought up if you hadn't seen it:
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests

Tabulating that data, you get the attached. I know it's just a small cross section of lenses, but each lens in Roger's test benefited from those added pixels, but how much those improvements are in different parts of the frame will vary.

(Newfound respect for that 300 f/2.8L IS II -- talk about future-proofing!)

- A

 

[davidmurray]

Why review this model of camera from a birding perspective when it was known from the beginning that it's target market is studio-based photographers.

 

[AlanF]

Would have been nice if the 7D Mark II had the AA cancellation or exclusion of the AA filter.

+1
Why on earth is Canon so conservative.

 

[ahsanford]

Why review this model of camera from a birding perspective when it was known from the beginning that it's target market is studio-based photographers.

The 5DS rigs are sizing up to be less specialty-based than we first thought.

Don't forget landscapers. Putting it on a tripod is as good using it in a studio (in keeping the ISO low).

So:

Studio and landscape: absolutely. Sports/wildlife/action: no.

But TDP and DXO (Q: How often do they agree? A: Never) both agree that the low light performance of the 5DS more on the order of the 5D3 than the 7D2 that many thought was coming. That says the above statement now becomes:

Studio and landscape: absolutely. General use, reportage, weddings, concerts, etc.: Why not? Sports/wildlife/action: no.

- A

P.S. And of course, 'no' is not a categorical no. You could use it for birding but it's clearly not as ideal as a 7D2 or 1DX.

 

[ahsanford]

Would have been nice if the 7D Mark II had the AA cancellation or exclusion of the AA filter.

+1
Why on earth is Canon so conservative.

Because its userbase is conservative. Just look at how people here have argued at how removing the AA filter is bad - samples of bird photography with moire, etc.

I slowly am warming up to this. There's low hanging fruit for sharpness without the AA. I've not historically been an AA filter opponent as Nikon's experience with the D800 vs. D800E vs. D810 was that it was a very, very small sharpness opportunity, and only at a given lens' absolute best apertures. So it wasn't worth it in my eyes.

But Roger's data (linked and shown above) shows a non-trivial sharpness bump for the 5DSR over the 5DS, even at f/2.8 for all three lenses. The reach-obsessed of this world who buy the 7D2 would have loved a '7D2R' option for that same reason.

And maybe that will still happen -- if Canon and Nikon can pump out Astro models every so often, how hard would it be to offer a 7D2R for (say) $1750 to tent up the price in that segment again? Birders would pay for that in a heartbeat, I think.

- A

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

THis is exactly why I was going on about Canon marketing not allowing for the crop mode to work in RAW. If it did, then you'd have a FF VF for easier tracking than with a 7D2, but still get the 7D2 reach and also an at least decent at least maybe 6.5fps and a nice buffer. They want you to have to buy 2 or 3 different bodies. Everyone was like Canon knows what they are doing, who needs a crop mode. THis is why.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Why review this model of camera from a birding perspective when it was known from the beginning that it's target market is studio-based photographers.

Because if they hadn't crippled it and made the crop mode also work for RAW, as say Nikon does, then it could've target more than one market at once and, in terms of their sales, it seems to make going for say an A7R II addition easier since you aren't giving up something great for high performance stuff anyway and get much better video and arguably better still anyway.

 

[dolina]

Would have been nice if the 7D Mark II had the AA cancellation or exclusion of the AA filter.

+1
Why on earth is Canon so conservative.

It would have made it a more compelling camera.

Actually the cancellation or exclusion of the AA filter would have been better off done with the Rebels first then work themselves up to the single digit bodies.

That way the cost of R&D would be spread out better and whatever hiccups would be isolated at the lowest end.

I am surprised that the bird photographer review did not use the 5Ds R as moire would not be as much of an issue as say textile or other types of fashion photography.

 

[pedro]

THis is exactly why I was going on about Canon marketing not allowing for the crop mode to work in RAW. If it did, then you'd have a FF VF for easier tracking than with a 7D2, but still get the 7D2 reach and also an at least decent at least maybe 6.5fps and a nice buffer. They want you to have to buy 2 or 3 different bodies. Everyone was like Canon knows what they are doing, who needs a crop mode. THis is why.

Why review this model of camera from a birding perspective when it was known from the beginning that it's target market is studio-based photographers.

Because if they hadn't crippled it and made the crop mode also work for RAW, as say Nikon does, then it could've target more than one market at once and, in terms of their sales, it seems to make going for say an A7R II addition easier since you aren't giving up something great for high performance stuff anyway and get much better video and arguably better still anyway.

So, in my own words (pedro):
With these business politics Canon will lose much more to Nikon and Sony. As an amateur I am not hugely invested in Canon glass according to my signature. But according to my understanding, Canon render highly unattractive on the long run with their rigid money milking attitude. I am really happy, that there are others in place, what Canon need is even stronger competition. Either they get it or they lose. The latter seems to be imminent (at least regarding their FF-dslr branch), based on their behaviour...

 

[AlanF]

Why review this model of camera from a birding perspective when it was known from the beginning that it's target market is studio-based photographers.

The review was useful for me as I am so keen to get a sensor without an AA filter that I was tempted by the 5DSr. There must be others in the same boat.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Why review this model of camera from a birding perspective when it was known from the beginning that it's target market is studio-based photographers.

Because if they hadn't crippled it and made the crop mode also work for RAW, as say Nikon does, then it could've target more than one market at once and, in terms of their sales, it seems to make going for say an A7R II addition easier since you aren't giving up something great for high performance stuff anyway and get much better video and arguably better still anyway.

I don't think that crop mode has been "crippled" rather "crop mode" is implemented in the same way that B&W mode is: it is post processing of raw.

If you shoot in B&W mode with both JPEG+RAW, you get a B&W JPEG but a full colour raw (which of course makes sense.) And crop mode has been implemented using the same "design" where raw is what comes from the sensor and JPEG is the result of the output filter (crop) being applied.

I.E. crippled.
They only allowed it to be a relatively useless in cam jpg post processing and didn't allow it to also function on the RAW as an option

And if it wasn't on purpose but just because they didn't know any better than they really need to stop using they super tightly focused groups where they talk these photographers so used to doing only one single thing and who tend to have rather little tech knowledge. It was like with the 5D2, they were actually surprised to find as soon as it was announced that people would want manual control for exposure for video! How could that be a surprise? Who is running the show?? Apparently they had some marketing guy decide video might be used by run and gun new reporters and they held a tight focus group ONLY with run and gun news guys and someone didn't have a single other person in the company with a remotely broader persepctive or the thought to survey more general users.

 

[NancyP]

This seems not too surprising. The action bodies will always be the 7D# and the 1D series.