Discussion
The R whilst sharper will suffer from moire when shooting materials with repeating patterns, fabric for example, which rules it out for fashion photographers. The R (and the new ultrawide zoom launched alongside it) is aimed purely at the landscape and architectural photographer who generally don't have to worry too greatly about moire.
Elderly said:
RobDickinson said:
....... Same DR.
That's disappointing.Once one manufacturer pushes the boundaries a little
the others would have to compete.
On the other hand the DR available probably exceeds the ability of most presentation media (print certsainly, screen .... probably) to display it.
So unless one seeks to recover stuff that was exposed in a less than perfect relationship to the final intended output medium ... does it matter?
I'm open to suggestions here. I don't claim to work at levels where absolute and ultimate DR are important.
If and when it is there seem to be technologies that blow anything related to DSLR DR a long way out of the water, albeit perhaps lacking ultimate IQ. But then, can our eyes cope with that?
What you capture isn't what you print or view.
With more dynamic range I can expose for the highlights and just push the shadows up rather than leaving them black or using filters.
You still print only say 8 stops but you have compressed the actual 15 into that.
It's the best solution to light sky dark land
With more dynamic range I can expose for the highlights and just push the shadows up rather than leaving them black or using filters.
You still print only say 8 stops but you have compressed the actual 15 into that.
It's the best solution to light sky dark land
RobDickinson said:
What you capture isn't what you print or view.
With more dynamic range I can expose for the highlights and just push the shadows up rather than leaving them black or using filters.
You still print only say 8 stops but you have compressed the actual 15 into that.
It's the best solution to light sky dark land
Yep, I appreciate that but how important is it for the "average" image?With more dynamic range I can expose for the highlights and just push the shadows up rather than leaving them black or using filters.
You still print only say 8 stops but you have compressed the actual 15 into that.
It's the best solution to light sky dark land
Some thoughts about what is already possible for Landscape images.
http://petapixel.com/2015/01/31/will-real-landscap...
Night Sky shots are a special case IMO.
I would have no qualms about people seeking maximum DR for such requirements. But equally there seems to be no real need to include that level of functionality for cameras aimed at different objectives. The majority of buyers will hardly take any shots at all, let alone be concerned about DR for star shots.
If Canon see the 5Ds / R as a device to attract Landscape shooters one might argue that they are not, in the main, so interested in night sky shots which would, in any case, benefit from a very different approach. (One Rob J Dickinson excepted of course!)
RobDickinson said:
The line is very blurry at this level.
Many users will be semi-pro at a minimum. They will shoot and make money but it wont be their primary income.
There will also be a bunch of pro's (who are now using 6d, 5d3 and 1dx) and some wealthy amateurs who really dont care about how much it costs or even if they will use it to its best.
For me a 50mp 15 stop DR sealed body with this ISO spec could replace my a7r (or add to it) but it sounds like it wont replace my astro camera (6d).
This mirrors my situation, and has thrown a potential cat amongst my pigeons. I was dithering over either of Nikon 810/Sony A7r and Pentax 645zMany users will be semi-pro at a minimum. They will shoot and make money but it wont be their primary income.
There will also be a bunch of pro's (who are now using 6d, 5d3 and 1dx) and some wealthy amateurs who really dont care about how much it costs or even if they will use it to its best.
For me a 50mp 15 stop DR sealed body with this ISO spec could replace my a7r (or add to it) but it sounds like it wont replace my astro camera (6d).
Now I want to see real world reviews and decent examples of the IQ hoping this could give me the resolution I might like from time to time at a lower price and with more lens choice. I reckon I could get the Canon and a Sony A7II or S for when I don't need the resolution and light is an issue. Then with the adapters be able to use the lenses or mix and match with other makes. For no more of an investment.
How good are Canon lenses compared with Zeiss or Leica? Admitting in the question that new ones may be coming, and different.
LongQ said:
Yep, I appreciate that but how important is it for the "average" image?
Some thoughts about what is already possible for Landscape images.
http://petapixel.com/2015/01/31/will-real-landscap...
Night Sky shots are a special case IMO.
I would have no qualms about people seeking maximum DR for such requirements. But equally there seems to be no real need to include that level of functionality for cameras aimed at different objectives. The majority of buyers will hardly take any shots at all, let alone be concerned about DR for star shots.
If Canon see the 5Ds / R as a device to attract Landscape shooters one might argue that they are not, in the main, so interested in night sky shots which would, in any case, benefit from a very different approach. (One Rob J Dickinson excepted of course!)
For an average image your humble 5D3 or even 1Ds 2 and 3 are absolutely plenty. They are good cameras rendering colours very naturally, only second to medium format backs. Some thoughts about what is already possible for Landscape images.
http://petapixel.com/2015/01/31/will-real-landscap...
Night Sky shots are a special case IMO.
I would have no qualms about people seeking maximum DR for such requirements. But equally there seems to be no real need to include that level of functionality for cameras aimed at different objectives. The majority of buyers will hardly take any shots at all, let alone be concerned about DR for star shots.
If Canon see the 5Ds / R as a device to attract Landscape shooters one might argue that they are not, in the main, so interested in night sky shots which would, in any case, benefit from a very different approach. (One Rob J Dickinson excepted of course!)
The only real drawback of these bodies is the magenta noise pattern in deep shadows. If they can get rid of it somehow it will be already a big winner. 1D X looks pretty good already I believe.
mr2man said:
How good are Canon lenses compared with Zeiss or Leica? Admitting in the question that new ones may be coming, and different.
Depends on the lens and its age.The new supertele's cant be beat (200-300-400-500-600).
Canons new zooms are amazing ( 70-200, 16-35, I assume the 11-24, 24-70, 70-300 and 100-400mk2).
Most of the new primes are good too, 24/28f2.8 IS, 17/24tse etc
There are some that arnt that great but..
Heres a fact , almost every lens will show resolution improvement on the new sensor. But at f11 and past you will be diffraction limited. It will even start to show at f8.
mr2man said:
This mirrors my situation, and has thrown a potential cat amongst my pigeons. I was dithering over either of Nikon 810/Sony A7r and Pentax 645z
Now I want to see real world reviews and decent examples of the IQ hoping this could give me the resolution I might like from time to time at a lower price and with more lens choice. I reckon I could get the Canon and a Sony A7II or S for when I don't need the resolution and light is an issue. Then with the adapters be able to use the lenses or mix and match with other makes. For no more of an investment.
How good are Canon lenses compared with Zeiss or Leica? Admitting in the question that new ones may be coming, and different.
Sony A9 is out in a few weeks. Sits above Sony A7 and uses same FE mount lenses. Likely new 50MP sensor.Now I want to see real world reviews and decent examples of the IQ hoping this could give me the resolution I might like from time to time at a lower price and with more lens choice. I reckon I could get the Canon and a Sony A7II or S for when I don't need the resolution and light is an issue. Then with the adapters be able to use the lenses or mix and match with other makes. For no more of an investment.
How good are Canon lenses compared with Zeiss or Leica? Admitting in the question that new ones may be coming, and different.
Surely the issue now is that there isn't any glass that can resolve 50mp of detail. The only current FE lense that gets close is the 55mm f1.8....
StuH said:
Surely the issue now is that there isn't any glass that can resolve 50mp of detail.
Again wrong thinking. You never resolve all the resolution of any sensor.More sensor resolution = more lens resolution. The two arnt identical and wont follow 1:1.
As for the new sony I will look on with interest. 14mp improvement over the a7r on its own isnt enough to make me change it.
There are some interesting sample shots creeping out as jpgs that look pretty impressive. (and large) Canon official web site and ePhotozine.com can oblige.
When the Nikon D800 appeared the images looked remarkable but I felt from the start that looked sort of "over sharpened" or something. Could have been the subject matter. I don't get the same impression with the 5DS or 5DSR samples I've seen but the details are still impressive.
However it seems that Canon have decided to split the market into high and (relatively) low ISO sectors and have not tried to create a hi res one-stop device for videography as well. So we might speculate that they will offer something later as a 5 series video targetted device for serious DLSR/video people in the middle market and the rumoured 5D4 as a 5D3 jack of all trades version in the hi-ISO market. (If not those model names then the devices with new monikers.)
Photographically such a strategy probably makes sense. Whether the market will agree remains to be seen.
When the Nikon D800 appeared the images looked remarkable but I felt from the start that looked sort of "over sharpened" or something. Could have been the subject matter. I don't get the same impression with the 5DS or 5DSR samples I've seen but the details are still impressive.
However it seems that Canon have decided to split the market into high and (relatively) low ISO sectors and have not tried to create a hi res one-stop device for videography as well. So we might speculate that they will offer something later as a 5 series video targetted device for serious DLSR/video people in the middle market and the rumoured 5D4 as a 5D3 jack of all trades version in the hi-ISO market. (If not those model names then the devices with new monikers.)
Photographically such a strategy probably makes sense. Whether the market will agree remains to be seen.
Ken Rockwell appears to have had a good pre-launch play with them
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/5ds.htm
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/5ds.htm
LastLight said:
Ken Rockwell appears to have had a good pre-launch play with them
http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/5ds.htm
I doubt Canon would let that moron near one! It looks as though he's just copied the blurb from the release info.http://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/5ds.htm
If you're marketing cameras it's probably better to have Ken inside your tent farting out than outside farting in... He gets lots of hits; people read his stuff.
(The fact he shoots in JPG with the colour turned up until it looks like the TV in a Chinese takeaway is neither here nor there!)
(The fact he shoots in JPG with the colour turned up until it looks like the TV in a Chinese takeaway is neither here nor there!)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n8L2bljfLiU
Someone has had a go with one tethered to the Canon booth at CP+
Someone has had a go with one tethered to the Canon booth at CP+
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff