Why 5D IV over 5DsR? Not for image quality

[saveyourmoment]

So i just played around with some comparison with the help of the dpreview files to make a decision on buying the 5DIV... Just for image Quality, the 5D IV looses against the 5DsR. So it all comes down to the "gimmicks", video functions and type of your photography to decide, which camera to use...

The image above is the 5DsR, ISO 12800, applyed noise reduction 50%!!, resized to the image size of the 5D IV,
The image below is the 5DIV, ISO 12800, orig size, no retouching...

i would love to see a 5dsR II with touchscreen, CFast, USB-C, Wifi (just for "tethered liveview, not for sending images to the remote!)...

 

[Sharlin]

Well, surely it's not a suprise to anyone that a camera with almos twice the pixels, a camera whose very existence is predicated on raw image quality, beats a generalist camera in the one area it is meant to excel in?

 

[keithcooper]

at 12800 ISO ??

For someone using the 5Ds regularly and appreciating those extra pixels, an example at 12800 ISO somewhat misses the point

I do sometimes push it to 800, whereas my 1Ds3 sometimes got used at 400 and my 1Ds at 200 ;-)

 

[Larsskv]

Well, surely it's not a suprise to anyone that a camera with almos twice the pixels, a camera whose very existence is predicated on raw image quality, beats a generalist camera in the one area it is meant to excel in?

I think you miss the point. The 5Ds/r are not meant to excel in high ISO. Many people have the impression that the 5Ds/r are meant for studio work. I think the demonstration above indicates that the 5Ds/r are more generalist cameras than many people think.

 

[Larsskv]

So i just played around with some comparison with the help of the dpreview files to make a decision on buying the 5DIV... Just for image Quality, the 5D IV looses against the 5DsR. So it all comes down to the "gimmicks", video functions and type of your photography to decide, which camera to use...

The image above is the 5DsR, ISO 12800, applyed noise reduction 50%!!, resized to the image size of the 5D IV,
The image below is the 5DIV, ISO 12800, orig size, no retouching...

i would love to see a 5dsR II with touchscreen, CFast, USB-C, Wifi (just for "tethered liveview, not for sending images to the remote!)...

Thank you for this demonstration. Still, I do think you should edit the 5DIV picture the best you could, and then compare the results.

 

[bholliman]

Re: at 12800 ISO ??

For someone using the 5Ds regularly and appreciating those extra pixels, an example at 12800 ISO somewhat misses the point

I do sometimes push it to 800, whereas my 1Ds3 sometimes got used at 400 and my 1Ds at 200 ;-)

I try to use my 6D for situations where I need higher ISO, but at times do use my 5DsR in poor light. I've been reasonably happy with 5DsR images at up to 3200 ISO with heavy noise reduction and downsizing. If I owned a 1Dx (Mk1 or 2) or 5D MkIV, those would be my preference for low light/high ISO.

 

[turtle]

Hi, I am not sure this is too surprising based on what you are looking at. 50MP gives you a lot of leeway with noise reduction.

However.... there is a lot more to 'image quality' than resolution and the ability to hold back luminance noise in the range you looked at. Colour noise, blotching, banding, high ISO colour fidelity and dynamic range all have a huge impact on final image quality for an image that is being worked very hard. In these areas, all tests show that the 5D IV is comfortably ahead of the 5DS/R (which itself is ahead of the 5D III).

If you are shooting a wedding and having to pull up shadows significantly, say with a shot on the dance floor against point light sources at ISO 1600/3200, the 5D IV will be a country mile ahead of the 5DS/R. The same goes for when you hit the noise floor with high contrast landscapes at base ISO. The old 'off sensor' ADC design of the 5DS/R isn't anywhere close to the new camera in terms of shadow recovery/exposure boosting. This should not surprise anyone either, because it is precisely what we have seen when comparing the 5DSR to the likes of the D750 or D810. It also looks like the 5D IV is at least competitive, if not slightly better at high ISO DR compared to those Nikon cameras.

So i just played around with some comparison with the help of the dpreview files to make a decision on buying the 5DIV... Just for image Quality, the 5D IV looses against the 5DsR. So it all comes down to the "gimmicks", video functions and type of your photography to decide, which camera to use...

The image above is the 5DsR, ISO 12800, applyed noise reduction 50%!!, resized to the image size of the 5D IV,
The image below is the 5DIV, ISO 12800, orig size, no retouching...

i would love to see a 5dsR II with touchscreen, CFast, USB-C, Wifi (just for "tethered liveview, not for sending images to the remote!)...

 

[dak723]

Comparing images at ISO 12800? That is your idea of how to judge Image Quality? Good luck to you!

 

[Zeidora]

I agree on the rather odd choice for comparing the cameras (ISO 12800). However, I do agree with OP on the basic premise, that the 5D3/4 have lots of gimmicks that are not terribly useful compared to much larger files of the 5Ds/R. At roughly same price, the trade-off of feature strongly tilts to the 5Ds/R even as a generalist camera.

I have no interest in either 5D3 or 4, but a 5DsR II may be worth considering (***, easier interchangeable focusing screens).

 

[IglooEater]

Can we agree to disagree here? The op's priority in regards to IQ appears to be resolution at high ISO. Other people have different priorities. In that specific application, I think OP is correct. The 5Ds does appear to resolve a little more, and the 5dIV will be even less once be is applied.
I might mention that it should be no surprise that 50 mp should resolve a little more than 30mp under almost any circumstances.

 

[3kramd5]

Comparing images at ISO 12800? That is your idea of how to judge Image Quality? Good luck to you!

Shrug, if that's where he/she shoots often, why not? It's more relevant a comparison to me than images shot at base and pushed six stops in post.

 

[unfocused]

To my eyes, it looks like the 5DIV has either a different exposure or has been processed slightly differently. The blacks are not as deep and the contrast is less, thus there appears to be more noise in the 5DIV shadow areas. It's a small difference, but I suspect that if you processed both to the same final appearance, the noise in the 5DIV file would at least match that of the 5Ds.

Still, what this shows me is that it takes some real effort to make the images coming out of any modern camera look bad. I think most people would agree that if you already own a 5Ds or a 5DIII, the sensor is not the main reason to upgrade.

On the other hand, I have found with the 1D XII that the files coming off this latest generation of sensors do seem to have a lot more processing flexibility, most notably in shadow and highlight recovery. It's not major, but as DPReview and others have noted, it is noticeable and makes post-processing a little easier.

 

[IglooEater]

Comparing images at ISO 12800? That is your idea of how to judge Image Quality? Good luck to you!

Shrug, if that's where he/she shoots often, why not? It's more relevant a comparison to me than images shot at base and pushed six stops in post.

True story.

 

[turtle]

I think it shows that if you work within the parameters of the example in your real photography, the 5DSR is sharper and has less noise, yes. However, what it does not show is the other features that may be helpful to a 5D IV shooter (depending on application of course), such as frame rate etc. Moreover, in terms of image quality terms, the example shown does not highlight the improved Dynamic Range on the new sensor. The extra dynamic range is irrelevant to some users, but highly relevant to others. For the second group, their appreciation of a good deal more DR and less pattern noise when files are pushed hard is not indicative of poor technique.

Clearly these two cameras have their strengths and weaknesses, but it is erroneous to suggest that this comparison proves that the 5DSR has 'better image quality'. In some respects, yes, but in others, it is a clear 'no'.

Sounds like the OP is objectively confirming that provided your photography isn't suffering soley from a lack of creature comfort features or poor technique in practice; the 5DSR is the clear winner. Even though the 5D Mark IV is better in every other spec, the 5DSR still has the capability to produce a better end result image.

I've got to believe that matters to many.

 

[saveyourmoment]

You are all right in your own ways. My example is an extreme one. I also tested all other possibilities, but that 12800 was something i didnt expect right away. Looking at the 5dsR at iso 12800 was a pain, but that i could use noisereduction and downsize the image and get the same or even better Image than the newest 5div was not expected. Shooting the 5dsR with ISO 12800 is nothing i would recommend. But this example showed me that i could use such a file and get an equal/better image to/than the 5div. So if image quality is my only concern and my work is done in approx. 90% in good light, i would choose the 5dsR the rest of the 10% i could recover without problems.

Nevertheless the 5dIV ist a great allaround camera. With a lot of new great features. I would love to see in high MP body.

If money is no problem:
sport/journalists: 1dx ii with 5div as backup
Wedding/Event. 1dx ii /5div and prob. 5dsR as backup
Wedding portraits: 5dsr
Goodlight/portraits/landscape/stills/macro: 5Dsr


It i would have to choose just one for shooting all together
5div. It is the best allrounder.

But if i have good or controlled light: 5dsR for everykind of photography. The 5dsr gives me the best and stunning image quality.

 

[Jack Douglas]

I'm with turtle on this one.

It does seem strange that anyone would focus on high ISO for a 5DSr application although if you own it you will have to work with it and it's nice to know how well it fares.

Jack

 

[dak723]

Even though the 5D Mark IV is better in every other spec, the 5DSR still has the capability to produce a better end result image.

I've got to believe that matters to many.

No, all the OP's test shows is that the 5DSR produces a better end result image at ISO 12,800. It may also produce a better image at ISO 200, but the test does absolutely nothing to show that. The 5D IV may produce the much better image at ISOs from 100- 3200. Again, the test gives us no idea. The idea that the result at ISO 12800 is indicative of results at low ISO is false. The headline - to be accurate - would read "Not for image quality at ISO 12800." That's all I'm saying.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Very easy to jump to conclusions isn't it.

Jack

 

[Memdroid]

I think it shows that if you work within the parameters of the example in your real photography, the 5DSR is sharper and has less noise, yes. However, what it does not show is the other features that may be helpful to a 5D IV shooter (depending on application of course), such as frame rate etc. Moreover, in terms of image quality terms, the example shown does not highlight the improved Dynamic Range on the new sensor. The extra dynamic range is irrelevant to some users, but highly relevant to others. For the second group, their appreciation of a good deal more DR and less pattern noise when files are pushed hard is not indicative of poor technique.

Clearly these two cameras have their strengths and weaknesses, but it is erroneous to suggest that this comparison proves that the 5DSR has 'better image quality'. In some respects, yes, but in others, it is a clear 'no'.

Sounds like the OP is objectively confirming that provided your photography isn't suffering soley from a lack of creature comfort features or poor technique in practice; the 5DSR is the clear winner. Even though the 5D Mark IV is better in every other spec, the 5DSR still has the capability to produce a better end result image.

I've got to believe that matters to many.

DR is a wash after ISO 400 on nearly all cameras. 5DIV has no real practical DR advantages on the 5DSr on medium to high ISO ranges.

 

[j-nord]

Although, in no way do I think this is a complete IQ comparison, I understand and appreciate what it shows. I am still deciding what upgrade path to follow for my 6D and a used 5DSR is top of my list. The price to performance ratio of a new 5DIV is not particularly attractive when compared to a used 5DSR. A new 6DII may be even more attractive than both if the m-pix is closer to 30 and has a flippy touch screen.