I'll make the bet it's 5D4 since its AF gets you shots you otherwise might miss and a missed shot at 50 MPs isn't much good. That would be assuming you're not dealing with very static birds, otherwise it's 5DSr - Alan am I close? 
Jack
Jack
Why 5D IV over 5DsR? Not for image quality
- Thread starter saveyourmoment
- Start date
5D4 vs. 5DSR...
5D4 wins on speed and high ISO...
5DS R wins on resolving power, reach and sharpness...
I'll say this, there's just nothing quite like a 5DSR shot razor-sharp at 100% view!
That said, personally I've been using the 5D3 and 5D4 a lot more lately mainly due to shooting environments.
5D4 wins on speed and high ISO...
5DS R wins on resolving power, reach and sharpness...
I'll say this, there's just nothing quite like a 5DSR shot razor-sharp at 100% view!
That said, personally I've been using the 5D3 and 5D4 a lot more lately mainly due to shooting environments.
Act444 said:
This sounds surprisingly similar to comments one hears about say the 600 lens vs 300 X 2. If something inhibits your use of it then it does not serve you very well in spite of it being superb. Of course its not a problem at all if you can afford/justify having it sitting. However, this is just a reality in life in general similar to owning expensive mechanic tools or whatever, sigh. A special tool does its job better than the alternative but typically gets used less.
Jack
I went out this evening in the fading light and tested the speed of AF of the 400mm DO II with 1.4x and 2xTC and the Sigma 150-600mm C (at 600mm) on the 7DII, 5DS R and 5D IV.
The Sigma slowly ambled and hunted into eventual focus on the 7DII. The 400mm DO II at 800mm was much faster but still relatively slow and hunted less. The 5DS R was somewhat faster with both and hunted less. On the 5DIV, the 150-600mm C was leisurely in focussing, but faster still. The 400 at 800mm snapped quickly into focus, and at 560mm with the 1.4xTC seemed to have instantaneous focus.
As an afterthought, I tested the 100-400mm II on the 5DS R, as I am taking it with me tomorrow to NYC as my lightweight travel birding kit. It focussed snappily at 400mm.
If you want great AF, go for the 5D IV. It even gives me more keepers for static birds as the focus is more consistent as well as being faster.
The Sigma slowly ambled and hunted into eventual focus on the 7DII. The 400mm DO II at 800mm was much faster but still relatively slow and hunted less. The 5DS R was somewhat faster with both and hunted less. On the 5DIV, the 150-600mm C was leisurely in focussing, but faster still. The 400 at 800mm snapped quickly into focus, and at 560mm with the 1.4xTC seemed to have instantaneous focus.
As an afterthought, I tested the 100-400mm II on the 5DS R, as I am taking it with me tomorrow to NYC as my lightweight travel birding kit. It focussed snappily at 400mm.
If you want great AF, go for the 5D IV. It even gives me more keepers for static birds as the focus is more consistent as well as being faster.
That's very interesting, Alan.
Are you able to offer some thoughts between the 7D2 and the 5D4, particularly regards cropping in low light. I realise the 7D2 has better resolution in good light but I was thinking how the pixel quality offers any advantages at (for example) 1600 and above.
Are you able to offer some thoughts between the 7D2 and the 5D4, particularly regards cropping in low light. I realise the 7D2 has better resolution in good light but I was thinking how the pixel quality offers any advantages at (for example) 1600 and above.
Mikehit said:
I tend to crop a lot and it really shows up the noise. Accordingly, I hardly ever go above 800 iso with the 7DII. It does outresolve the 5DIV but the larger pixels do give a crisper image and you can indeed go to higher iso. Some of my best bird shots have been with the 7DII (and before that the 7D), but you get spoiled by the 5DS R as its sharpness and AF are definitely superior. I'm not using the 7DII any more, which is a waste as it is very good.
Re: at 12800 ISO ??
I still consider my 6d my high ISO go to camera over my 5d IV. Don't get me wrong the 5D rocks, but 3200 and up the 6d shows it's worth and has smaller file size to boot. Both focus very well in low light, both smoke my 1ds mkiII in this regard.bholliman said:keithcooper said: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.
Similar threads
