The 5DsR mk2

[GMCPhotographics]

The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.
You know the file size when you are buying it but 50mp tends to be a waste.
I think they crammed too many MP's in the sensor to get to fifty and overstretched it.
I've felt the same with the 7DII (similar if not same MP density).
It wasn't a great buy.
It is slow, there is a second or two delay between taking the photo and it displaying which I find annoying.
It performs best on a tripod at ISO100.
If they bring out a 5DSR Mark II it would need to be really excellent to convince me to upgrade.
The detail it would bring out would have to be a step above the 5D IV.
It's performance at ISO 1600 onwards would need to be alot better

Of course it could be mirrorless which would be a different take.
I think if Canon go mirrorless the first camera has to be very good.

I could not disagree more.
Ive taken thousands of shots with my 5DS mainly in the studio shooting portraits but also landscapes and even on a safari. One area it could do with improvement is low ISO no question but making a statement you cannot see differences between the 5D MKIII or even the 5D IV in details etc. so factually incorrect. The camera has consistently impressed in this area and as I shoot predominately at ISO 100 with a 160 shutter speed using strobes both the level of keepers, detail & sharpness have been a notch above the 5D MKIV not to say that camera is bad but to point out 50MP really does give great results when you nail exposure & focusing.

Would I buy a MKII if it improved over the MK1? In a heartbeat.

I've taken 10's of thousands of photographs with a 5DSR and other than perfect conditions eg ISO 100 it doesn't perform nearly as well as a 5DIII or a 5DIV. It performs best in a studio but then most gear does. It's not a bad camera but not worth the file size afterwards. As always I may have a bad copy but I'm not the first to be not fully supportive of it as a camera. If I had no camera and was buying a full frame I'd get the 5DIV first in a heartbeat.

Yes I'm with you here. When the 5DSR was announced I looked at the spec and thought that the 5DIII/IV was a far more versatile camera. I don't need that silly high MP and it'll just put a huge strain on my workflow, storage and shooting requirement. A camera with that kind of resolution will need a tripod for most of the time, the reciprocal shutter speed rule breaks down and it's it's pretty clear that it'll be an iso 100 only camera (compared to a mk4).
I figured that Canon was forced to make this camera to appease the forum fan boys who have a hunger for maxxed out MP...but hey it's not 2005 any more and 25-30mp is more than adequate.
While I appreciate that it's an amazing niche camera and it's a technical marvel, I do question it's application as a photographic tool. In most uses a mk4 is a wiser choice.
For my shooting (a lot of portraits, weddings and fair bit of landscape and a little bit of wildlife) I just don't need noisy large files. So I'm happy with the regular 5D series cameras.

 

[docsmith]

If only there were a leak to give me a reason not to buy the a7Riii

What a ridiculous poll. Three negative choices, one pretty irrelevant and the only positive choice so distorted in unlikely features that it is difficult to expect them and check that box.

+1.

I can't find the option for "It will only offer 80% as much as the competition but it will work reliably and seamlessly with my other gear and will sell really well" on this poll.

- A

^^^ This....and...

I can't answer the poll since none of the choices are close to my opinion, which is:

The 5Ds(R) II will be a nice upgrade to its excellent predecessor.

^^^^This....

The 5Ds II will be a very capable, methodical upgrade. As others have said, on-chip conversion, Wi-Fi, gps, lower light AF (-3 or 4 EV), a few more MP (24 APS-C sensors scaled up is 62.5 MP), latest dual digic 7, 5DIV form factor, 6 fps, DPAF, and some video features (4K at 30 fps, FHD at 60 fps, etc). In short, some improvements, but mostly a 5DIV with a larger sensor.

If that does not interest you, buy the Sony. But people seem to really like the 5DsR and I am sure the Mk II will be better.

As for me, my 5DIII took amazing pictures. And a few test runs with the 5DIV and I am very happy with the upgrade (mostly AF and Wi-Fi at this point). I've played with Sony's in stores and did not come away happy. Plus, when I mock assemble my entire kit, Canon wins hands down. But, to each their own.

 

[tron]

If only there were a leak to give me a reason not to buy the a7Riii

What a ridiculous poll. Three negative choices, one pretty irrelevant and the only positive choice so distorted in unlikely features that it is difficult to expect them and check that box.

+1.

I can't find the option for "It will only offer 80% as much as the competition but it will work reliably and seamlessly with my other gear and will sell really well" on this poll.

- A

^^^ This....and...

I can't answer the poll since none of the choices are close to my opinion, which is:

The 5Ds(R) II will be a nice upgrade to its excellent predecessor.

^^^^This....

The 5Ds II will be a very capable, methodical upgrade. As others have said, on-chip conversion, Wi-Fi, gps, lower light AF (-3 or 4 EV), a few more MP (24 APS-C sensors scaled up is 62.5 MP), latest dual digic 7, 5DIV form factor, 6 fps, DPAF, and some video features (4K at 30 fps, FHD at 60 fps, etc). In short, some improvements, but mostly a 5DIV with a larger sensor.

If that does not interest you, buy the Sony. But people seem to really like the 5DsR and I am sure the Mk II will be better.

As for me, my 5DIII took amazing pictures. And a few test runs with the 5DIV and I am very happy with the upgrade (mostly AF and Wi-Fi at this point). I've played with Sony's in stores and did not come away happy. Plus, when I mock assemble my entire kit, Canon wins hands down. But, to each their own.

+1 on the features. Down to earth and useful. The only thing is that with these features Canon can release it today (OK I mean Q1, Q2 2018). Were to wait a little longer, I would expect them to have an even newer digic and make it 7fps. In all cases they could increase buffer a little.

 

[Talys]

If that does not interest you, buy the Sony. But people seem to really like the 5DsR and I am sure the Mk II will be better.

As for me, my 5DIII took amazing pictures. And a few test runs with the 5DIV and I am very happy with the upgrade (mostly AF and Wi-Fi at this point). I've played with Sony's in stores and did not come away happy. Plus, when I mock assemble my entire kit, Canon wins hands down. But, to each their own.

This. I don't know why people can't just go buy their really awesome techno gizmo be happy, and stop griping about how Canon is going to go out of business. I have played with 5DSRII in the field and 5DSRIII in the store, and neither come close to making me happy or convincing me to pull the trigger on what would be a very expensive system that trades a lot of usability and built-like-a-tank ruggedness for a better sensor and a big bag of tricks that is mostly not very useful to me.

The price of glass matters to me too; the Sony system is awesomely expensive if you want their top-end zooms -- nearly twice the price compared to Canon sale/street prices on popular lenses like 70-200/2.8 or 100-400, and nearly four times the price as third party lenses for Canon; plus, often, their second-tier alternatives are poor.

 

[Ozarker]

I own a 1Dx, 1Dx mk2 and 5DsR...theres no bias...its honesty. Canon cant help itself from protecting the cinema line to make the camera that needs to be made. Also hows it gonna handicap the 5DsR mk2 to protect the 5D mk4. We all know the 5DsR wont be 4k60p...but it should be and not at 800mbps. Will it have 4k hdmi out...probably not. Now I cant do 4k live streams. I dont want to switch. I hate the way the a9 feels in my hands and ive shot over 7,000 pics with it. I want DPAF but whats the point if I need to spend over 1,000 per hour of CFast2 4k60p. Im willing to live with GOOD ENOUGH video AF sony has now.

Id pay 6,000 for a 5DsR mk2 with low light equal to the a7r iii, 4k 60p, IBIS, 4k hdmi out, 8-10 fps, 50 RAW frame buffer uncompressed, DPAF, wifi. Thats all very realistic. If I saw a leak that it was coming out next summer Id wait for it unless the A7Siii pulled me away from the C200.

I want canon to do better. Im not gonna make excuses for it to keep being less than it should be.

Oh and my 5DsR is USELESS for profesisonal video. thats really the biggest thing pushing me away from it. Hell a canon xf400 has DPAF and 4k60P out.

The whole premise that Canon is protecting the Cinema line is flawed, as is the premise that Canon will be protecting the 5D mark IV from it. Canon builds Cameras to reach a particular market. Heck! maybe Canon is protecting the 5DSr from the 5D mark IV. See how that works? It's just silly.

The camera isn't what it should be? Yeah, people want $10,000 cameras at powershot prices. :

 

[Ozarker]

The 5DSR Mark I hasn't really impressed me as a camera.
Maybe its my version but the 5D III and 5D IV that I have are better in terms of image quality.
It doesn't perform well as the ISO goes up.
I was never blown away by its detail as I didn't think it ever showed any more detail than a 5D III.
I'd find the image quality in the 5D IV much better than it.

What lenses, what setup? The difference between 5DSR and 5D III is night and day - with the right lenses.

Nifty fifty. :

 

[Ozarker]

Such a nonsense. But I have to congratulate the marketing departments of the camera companies. They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough. Youtube also has a significant share in this stupidity.

If you know what you are doing there is zero possibility that there is a picture you cant take because you have "just" a 5dmk4 or a 1DXmk2. I still have a original 1DX and all my big prints look amazing. Just 18 MPix. More than enough.

I've never had or seen a marketing department tell me that my gear isn't good enough. I decide that. People who let marketing depts. make decisions for them are not thinking and and fit into the "drone" category. If Canon can take their money, then they deserve to have it taken.

 

[Ozarker]

What is everyone's experience using the 5Ds/r for landscape or wildlife photography? Can you use it hand-held? Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?

Just speaking to the lens question, as Uncle Rog shows here...

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests/

...a rising tide lifts all boats, but better boats are lifted higher. All lenses in his test (3 very good + 1 older/used/banged up) show a greater resolving power on the finer 50 MP canvas, but the quality of the lens dictates how much better it gets.

- A

This part got a giggle out of me. If only the 5DSr could take EF-S lenses.

"Any reason to be concerned if you are using only L glass?"

 

[Talys]

Such a nonsense. But I have to congratulate the marketing departments of the camera companies. They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough. Youtube also has a significant share in this stupidity.

If you know what you are doing there is zero possibility that there is a picture you cant take because you have "just" a 5dmk4 or a 1DXmk2. I still have a original 1DX and all my big prints look amazing. Just 18 MPix. More than enough.

I've never had or seen a marketing department tell me that my gear isn't good enough. I decide that. People who let marketing depts. make decisions for them are not thinking and and fit into the "drone" category. If Canon can take their money, then they deserve to have it taken.

Every camera company does it, indirectly, in the same way that car manufacturers and smartphone makers tell you that your current stuff isn't good enough.

First, they describe the new model as the best version ever, the pinnacle of technology and back it up with a bunch of 3 and 4 letter acronyms. Because your current gear doesn't have the latest alphabet soup, it's inferior to the latest model.

Second, they tease you with amazing samples that most people dream of. For cars, it's lifestyle, like driving in picturesque rugged outdoors or racing down a desert stretch, or a beautiful woman throwing her hair in the wind. For cameras, it's a perfect shot of a photographer happily taking photos from a kayak in the perfect lake (seen the latest Canon Best in Glass ads in the movies?). For a cell phone, it's visualizing orcas or a perfectly fit, beautiful person doing something fun or active.

In common is that what's holding you back is your stuff. Buy the latest stuff and this lifestyle and happiness can be yours too! Capture these perfect droplets of water and swooping eagles with just a snap of the shutter!

But, I mean, I don't fault them for it. They are aspirational ads, and if you fall for shiny new car = meet random beautiful woman while driving down the road or buy new camera = perfect photos from perfect outdoor adventures, you should probably be prepared for disappointment

 

[Ozarker]

Such a nonsense. But I have to congratulate the marketing departments of the camera companies. They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough. Youtube also has a significant share in this stupidity.

If you know what you are doing there is zero possibility that there is a picture you cant take because you have "just" a 5dmk4 or a 1DXmk2. I still have a original 1DX and all my big prints look amazing. Just 18 MPix. More than enough.

I've never had or seen a marketing department tell me that my gear isn't good enough. I decide that. People who let marketing depts. make decisions for them are not thinking and and fit into the "drone" category. If Canon can take their money, then they deserve to have it taken.

Every camera company does it, indirectly, in the same way that car manufacturers and smartphone makers tell you that your current stuff isn't good enough.

First, they describe the new model as the best version ever, the pinnacle of technology and back it up with a bunch of 3 and 4 letter acronyms. Because your current gear doesn't have the latest alphabet soup, it's inferior to the latest model.

Second, they tease you with amazing samples that most people dream of. For cars, it's lifestyle, like driving in picturesque rugged outdoors or racing down a desert stretch, or a beautiful woman throwing her hair in the wind. For cameras, it's a perfect shot of a photographer happily taking photos from a kayak in the perfect lake (seen the latest Canon Best in Glass ads in the movies?). For a cell phone, it's visualizing orcas or a perfectly fit, beautiful person doing something fun or active.

In common is that what's holding you back is your stuff. Buy the latest stuff and this lifestyle and happiness can be yours too! Capture these perfect droplets of water and swooping eagles with just a snap of the shutter!

But, I mean, I don't fault them for it. They are aspirational ads, and if you fall for shiny new car = meet random beautiful woman while driving down the road or buy new camera = perfect photos from perfect outdoor adventures, you should probably be prepared for disappointment

Well, I guess I see it as showing us what the new product offers. When Canon shows a new Camera or lens I don't feel that what I have is inferior and don't feel that is what Canon is trying to do. If I think my "gear" is now inferior because of something new... that's my problem. My gear might very well be inferior to something new. That's the point of a new product... to make something better.

There are people posting here often saying stuff that came out last year or even getting ready to come out are somehow obsolete already. The great thing about photography is that it is usually the photographer who is inferior to his gear.

Example: In many ways the 5D mark III is inferior to the Mark IV. But, I decide to wait on the Mark V.

While the point of marketing is to entice people to buy, I don't see it as a nefarious act by marketing. Afterall, without marketing we wouldn't know that many things even existed.

"They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough."

I still must disagree with that statement. Canon never tells me that. They just point out the features of the new product. The 5D mark III is good enough for me, but I'll still buy a Mark V. Why? Because my Mark III will probably be about 7 years old and I'll want something new. It isn't that I'll think it isn't good enough.

My 1968 Ford Fairlane GT was plenty good enough. Got me from A-B just fine. It was a tool and worked very well. I wanted newer tech. That's all.

 

[stevelee]

I got a 6D2 almost two months ago. I have been more than pleased with the purchase, and more importantly, with the pictures and video I have shot in that time. I'm still learning how to do things, and learning things I can do that I didn't know about before. The 24-105 STM lens has been a good addition to my arsenal. The weak point in my gear is the 75-300mm zoom as the only lens longer than the 105. I had made surprisingly good eclipse pictures with it on my T3i, so it is not a piece of junk, just disappointing relative to everything else I use, especially in terms of CA. Maybe I'll be able to replace it some time next year.

The main insight that I have from this process that I think is relevant to this discussion is my realization that I never really learned to exploit all the potential of the T3i. Although I bought two books on that camera model, I think I have already spent more time reading the extended 6D2 manual than in did over 5 or 6 years reading about the T3i. It helps that I have the PDF manual on my iPad, so it is handy leisure reading between doing other things. And obviously new toys get the most attention.

I will be doing a fair amount of travel over the holidays, and the DSLRs will stay home, and I'll be shooting with my pocketable G7X II. I've been quite pleased with the results from it. It will be interesting to see what I miss having after shooting FF with a fair number of features.

 

[tron]

If I were to guess: T7/1400D: first half of 2018, 7DIII : second half of 2018 (sorry for being conservative/realistic) 5DsR II: 2019. Of course I would welcome an earlier upgrade.

 

[Sporgon]

Yes I'm with you here. When the 5DSR was announced I looked at the spec and thought that the 5DIII/IV was a far more versatile camera. I don't need that silly high MP and it'll just put a huge strain on my workflow, storage and shooting requirement.

While I appreciate that it's an amazing niche camera and it's a technical marvel, I do question it's application as a photographic tool.

I just don't need noisy large files. So I'm happy with the regular 5D series cameras.

I'm not sure this is the right way to look at it. File storage is cheap. Computer processing is not, but then as most likely a raw shooter with decent software you can just convert your CR2 files to the same size as your 22 mp 5DIII or whatever, so processing is not slowed down at all. The excessively high mp goes towards reducing the colour definition limitations of the Bayer array effect, so theoretically you gain from interpolating the larger file down, and still have the option of the full size file if you should ever want it. Likewise the reduction reduces noise down to the same levels as those cameras of equal vintage and mp that you are reducing to. The only drawback is the speed of the camera really, which may or may not be important. If you're a jpeg shooter then just use a smaller jpeg setting !

 

[jasonwei]

Hope it will come out earlier.

 

[Talys]

"They are so successful by telling people that their gear is not good enough."

I still must disagree with that statement. Canon never tells me that. They just point out the features of the new product. The 5D mark III is good enough for me, but I'll still buy a Mark V. Why? Because my Mark III will probably be about 7 years old and I'll want something new. It isn't that I'll think it isn't good enough.

My 1968 Ford Fairlane GT was plenty good enough. Got me from A-B just fine. It was a tool and worked very well. I wanted newer tech. That's all.

Fair enough

It's just funny that you say it, because I've been seeing Canon ads in the movies quite often recently -- and being someone who loves wildlife/nature photography, I sure do wish I could take shots like that However, I fully understand that it has absolutely nothing to do with me owning a 6DII rather than the 5DIV the guy has in the video, hehehe.

 

[Mancubus]

Here is how to make a successful 5DSR2:

- Take a Canon 5D4
- Get rid of the damn AA filter
- Bump the resolution to 50+ MP
- Give it a medium (~30MP) and a small (~20MP) RAW file option that uses the sensor in a clever way getting more light on each pixel instead of just resizing a 50MP file
- Update anything that is over 10 years old (like the 4K codec and the SD card)
- Don't f**k up anything that you're not supposed to (such as giving it a s**t DR like the 6D2)

Do this and I'd gladly pay 4000usd for it.

 

[3kramd5]

Here is how to make a successful 5DSR2:


- Give it a medium (~30MP) and a small (~20MP) RAW file option that uses the sensor in a clever way getting more light on each pixel instead of just resizing a 50MP file

Do this and I'd gladly pay 4000usd for it.

You might as well have said you’d pay 40,000USD for it.

 

[Sporgon]

Here is how to make a successful 5DSR2:

- Get rid of the damn AA filter...

I thought that in time the "r" would have a disproportionately higher used value to the plain "s", in a similar way to what happened with the Nikon D800, and so the extra £200 spent on a new "r" would be money well spent in the long term. However here in the U.K. it seems that on the used market the "s" is making the same or even more money. Certainly there are a lot less "s" ones for sale.

So I guess that there are many out there who would disagree about leaving the "damn" AA filter out

Certainly for myself I went for the 5Ds and had to go to more lengths to get one. My local pro dealer has them on back order........

 

[Mancubus]

Here is how to make a successful 5DSR2:


- Give it a medium (~30MP) and a small (~20MP) RAW file option that uses the sensor in a clever way getting more light on each pixel instead of just resizing a 50MP file

Do this and I'd gladly pay 4000usd for it.

You might as well have said you’d pay 40,000USD for it.

Why is that? It doesn't seem impossible, just a way of getting more light (using more sensor area) per pixel when not using the camera in the maximum megapixel setting.

To my understanding, that would allow some noise level similar to a 1DX Mark II (even less noise if technology improves). Much better than having the camera just resizing what would be a regular 50+ MP file.

 

[midluk]

Why is that? It doesn't seem impossible, just a way of getting more light (using more sensor area) per pixel when not using the camera in the maximum megapixel setting.

To my understanding, that would allow some noise level similar to a 1DX Mark II (even less noise if technology improves). Much better than having the camera just resizing what would be a regular 50+ MP file.

Can you specify what you mean by "resizing"?