Jump to content
  • 0
Sign in to follow this  
Bob J

Canon 5DSr - anyone got one?

Question

I currently shoot with a trusty old 5D Mk2 and its fine but I was wondering about my next purchase and I am comfortable with Canon menus and I have the canon flash system and lenses that I am loathe to change. I was considering the 6D Mk2 (nice and light) but also considering if there was any real value to having the extra pixel count of the 5DSr. My main thing is travel, landscapes and city images.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

More pixels, for the bulk of images sold here are unneeded. So many (most) are sold for web uses and editorial within a magazine, book, newspaper or catalog.

Yet...extra pixels are nice if anyone wants billboard or other large uses. Also great for cropping the heck out of them and still have a decent size left. Also reducing overall size to increase sharpness for those borderline soft images.

Worse for eating up storage.

Only you know what sock fits your foot. ūüėĀ

Betty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

At some point I would like to hire a 5DS to try it out. I tend to shoot a lot of subjects which require subsequent cropping, even with a long tele lens, and I'd like to see how well the 5DS stands up in that situation. I'd also want to see how well my computer handles the larger file size: I think it could get a severe case of indigestion, as it is quite old now. That's probably going to be the deal breaker as far as actually buying one is concerned. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Posted (edited)

My main camera is a 50 megapixel 5Ds. I used to shoot with a MK 5D2. I also use a sony MX100 for walkabout work, so  not married to 50 megapixels. 5DR tends toward moire, 5Ds less so.

Sensor is better in 5Ds over 5D2 so I was able to move from ISO 100 in the 5D2, to ISO 400 in the 5Ds for highest quality setting. Lot less tripod work. I love the, in viewfinder, level in 5Ds.

In very high iso able to downsize to eliminate noisy shadows and still have 24 megapixel image.

50 megapixels is a real test of a lens, so you may find your 5D2 lenses wanting. I use WA/Normal Zeiss primes and 70-200 F4 Canon zoom.

50 megapixels is very easy to crop and still maintain 22.5 megapixels. So if you do not have the time to take both a vertical and horizontal then crop, as these two images from one horizontal shot

 

black-capped-chickadee-poecile-atricapil

 

black-capped-chickadee-poecile-atricapil.

 

 

Edited by Bill Brooks
clarity

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
10 minutes ago, Bill Brooks said:

My main camera is a 50 megapixel 5Ds. I used to shoot with a MK 5D2. I also use a sony MX100 for walkabout work, so  not married to 50 megapixels. 5DR tends toward moire, 5Ds less so.

Sensor is better in 5Ds over 5D2 so I was able to move from ISO 100 in the 5D2, to ISO 400 in the 5Ds for highest quality setting. Lot less tripod work. I love the, in viewfinder, level in 5Ds.

In very high iso able to downsize to eliminate noisy shadows and still have 24 megapixel image.

50 megapixels is a real test of a lens, so you may find your 5D2 lenses wanting. I use WA/Normal Zeiss primes and 70-200 F4 Canon zoom.

50 megapixels is very easy to crop and still maintain 22.5 megapixels. So if you do not have the time to take both a vertical and horizontal then crop, as these two images from one horizontal shot

 

 

As a high MP Nikon user since 2012, I agree with all of that. I love these high MP cameras. They do need excellent lenses and a decent computer for comfort.

 

A lot was made of the moiré thing when Nikon introduced the D800E and it is rarely an issue. I have never seen moiré in a landscape or architectural photo. The only time I see moiré is in clothing, typically men's suits with very fine patterns. It is a pain as I never see it when shooting and only discover it later. I use the local adjustments in Lightroom to minimise it when I see it. Nikon have completely dropped the low pass filter in their later high MP cameras so it is impossible to compare nowadays unless one kept a D800 which I didn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I have the 5D MkII and MkIII and an old 1Ds (the original). A few months ago I bought the new EOS R - it's a cracking little camera (30MP) and produces much sharper files than my old cameras. It's just the AF system that needs adjusting to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Thanks guys. I have now had the offer of a loan of a 5Ds so I will play with that for a while and see how the responses above play out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I think you might find the 5D MK IV to be a large improvement over the Mark II and more suitable for stock photography.  The file size of the Mark IV are of a more reasonable size. It has great auto focus and high ISO performance and is a better all round camera.  I regularly submit images shot at ISO 12,800 with no problem.  From what I understand from the reviews the 6D MK II is a step backward in dynamic range.  The one thing it has going for it is that it is cheap. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
On 03/07/2019 at 22:59, Johnnie5 said:

I think you might find the 5D MK IV to be a large improvement over the Mark II and more suitable for stock photography.  The file size of the Mark IV are of a more reasonable size. It has great auto focus and high ISO performance and is a better all round camera.  I regularly submit images shot at ISO 12,800 with no problem.  From what I understand from the reviews the 6D MK II is a step backward in dynamic range.  The one thing it has going for it is that it is cheap. 

Thanks Jonnie; funnily enough it is now the Mk4 that I am seriously leaning towards having played with the 5Ds and also a 6D mk2 in the last week.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I've been using the 5DsR for the past 4 years for my aerial photography.  The increased resolution over the MK II and MK III is noticeable. It is not the best for low light but still If you take a look at my images you'll see some night shots over LA that were taken with this camera at ISO800 and ISO1600 and it definitely worked for me.  For sunny day work this camera has banished all of my medium format desires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
18 hours ago, Bob J said:

Thanks Jonnie; funnily enough it is now the Mk4 that I am seriously leaning towards having played with the 5Ds and also a 6D mk2 in the last week.

 

I went from a 5D Mark II to a Mark IV. Seriously, get it! Got to Hdew Cameras and they have them for £1799 new.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Here is an example of an image taken at ISO 12800

The Carroll Shelby museum a Tourist attraction in Las Vegas Nevada USA Stock Photo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
2 hours ago, Johnnie5 said:

Here is an example of an image taken at ISO 12800

The Carroll Shelby museum a Tourist attraction in Las Vegas Nevada USA Stock Photo

Yup - that says a great deal about the low light capability. Thanks for the stockis tip as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.