For those that have the Money 5Ds & 5Ds R

[russellsnr]

Hi, As the title 'If you can afford it'
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/ca...e-photos-26928
Had a quick look and if you want/need 50MP then yes but cannot understand Canons stance on 3 X AEB, No wireless or GPS option (in camera), No flip out screen, OK I no it is for the pro photographer but a flip out screen can be very handy at times.
As I say JMO as no matter what the price is I cannot afford it, maybe David Noton will give his test unit
Russ

[Geoff F]

But for me, more pixels would mean getting a more powerful computer as well; just to handle the file size. And that would mean loading all the software again, to say nothing of setting the personal preferences!

That thought alone is making me reluctant to purchase one.

It does sound a bargain compared with Hasselblad though.

[Bobobird]

Price and specs comparison with 5D3.
http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/profes...01e0248045e25e

Frame rate down by 1. Does not say anything about buffering. On the 5D3, it is 17 continuous shots before camera stalls.

[DanK]

A surprisingly small premium compared to the 5D3. I still don't want one, but good news for those who do.

[Manfred M]

But for me, more pixels would mean getting a more powerful computer as well; just to handle the file size.

That same incorrect rumour was going around when Nikon introduced the D800 / D800E. With some minor exceptions, the file size is not going to have a significant effect on the editing processes. I edit files from the D90 (12 MP), Panasonic GX7 (16 MP) and D800 (36 MP). With the exception of some of the more complex filters, I see no difference in edit speed and in the case of the complex filters, the difference from the smallest to the largest file sizes can be measured in a few seconds.

Where one does notice a significant difference is the file download from the memory card; a faster (and more expensive) card will make a difference and there will also be a hit on file storage; get an additional (external) hard drive. Load time / save time to and from hard disk for multi-layer Photoshop PSD times is probably the biggest speed factor. My files are often into the hundreds of MB, so disk read / write speeds are definitely slower than with smaller files.

[rpcrowe]

if you are shooting with large file size cameras which have dual slots, I strongly suggest that you use the fastest CF cards available which incorporate the latest UDMA technology. These will both write and will download faster (given that you use a card reader that is compatible with the UDMA technology that your card is using) than slower or non-UDMA CF cards and faster than any SD cards on the market today. You will pay a premium price for these cards by very reputable manufacturers (I use mostly Lexar and Sandisk cards) but their speed and durability is well worth the cost!

[DropsOfLight]

I've recently brought the 5D Mk III so was horrified to hear about the release of the 5Ds. On further reading I would still go with the 5d Mk III. Here's why. The 5Ds is not as good in low light - the ISO range is 100 - 12800, the 5D Mk III is 50 - 102800 (both showing their expanded settings) and the 5Ds will need very, very good prime lenses to really make the most of the sensor. You'll be spending between £1500 and £2000 on average and you will need a lot to cover the range of a good L series zoom that you can use on the 5D Mk III.
My advice - go with the 5D Mk III unless you really need to shoot for very large format prints that need the quality and you can afford the lenses to make the most of the sensor.

[JR1]

I'll wait till the D5 Nikon comes out later this year

I would think it would be a good Studio/landscape camera but I use my D4s 90% more than I do my D810

[Manfred M]

Thomas - I would have thought that the 5D (plus the newer Mk II and Mk III versions) were the target of the L lenses. The Canon 5D Mk II and MK III shooters I know seem to have gone that way.

[Geoff F]

But for me, more pixels would mean getting a more powerful computer as well; just to handle the file size. And that would mean loading all the software again, to say nothing of setting the personal preferences!

Probably OK for simple straight shots but at the moment, with a 7D, I'm getting problems when converting 3 or more RAW images then processing in a stack; unless I resize downwards beforehand, or convert to Jpeg.

[DropsOfLight]

Hi Manfred, I totally agree, though with the 5D3 you can happily use L series zoom lenses - reading the reviews, the advice is to use prime lenses to get the most out of the sensor - to cover the spectrum you'd nee to the 14mm, 24mm, 50mm 85mm, 180mm (macro) 200mm, 300mm .... that's about £7K!!!

[Manfred M]

Hi Manfred, I totally agree, though with the 5D3 you can happily use L series zoom lenses - reading the reviews, the advice is to use prime lenses to get the most out of the sensor - to cover the spectrum you'd nee to the 14mm, 24mm, 50mm 85mm, 180mm (macro) 200mm, 300mm .... that's about £7K!!!

Similar to the video industry when that format went HD; the top end feature films are no longer shot with primarily with zooms, but rather with primes from the likes of Zeiss, Cooke, Schneider, Leica and Red. A set of these will set the cinematographer back $100K - $300K.

At £7K, the Canon lenses look like a bargain.

All that being said, to get the optimal performance out of these lenses / camera combination, the camera will have to be mounted on a heavy-duty, sandbagged tripod with a heavy-duty head and shot at f/8 (to stay above the diffraction limit). So whoever is giving that advice is rather full of it and not looking at the realities of photography.

The same type of stories floated around when Nikon came out with the D800 and people are happily shooting across the range of pro glass and regular glass and still getting great shots.

[chweyd]

... and the 5Ds will need very, very good prime lenses to really make the most of the sensor. ...

I have the 60D, 70D and 5DS - the pixel density/size on those cameras is almost identical. Every single lens which gives sharp pictures on the 70D or other 20MP APS-C cameras will work perfectly on the 5DS. The 5DS sensor is in terms of ISO sensitivity, sharpness, noise comparable to the 60D, 70D 7D or 7DMKII - its just bigger. The higher the pixel density the more careful you must be to avoid camera movements and maybe little more sensitive to corner sharpness/vignetting.

I cannot agree with those comments which complain a the low max. ISO or noise levels - up to 3200 the 5DS behaves pretty much the same, but the 5DS is NOT made for that - the main purpose of this camera is landscape, studio, portraits... - for that you normally don't need high ISO, you probably shoot most of the time between 100-400.

Depending on what you do with your images you might not need that high resolution, if you watch your pictures on a screen or do printouts up to 50cm a 12-20MP camera is sufficient - but is you work with crops, high res and large prints then the difference between 20MP and a 5DS is stunning.

[Shadowman]

But for me, more pixels would mean getting a more powerful computer as well; just to handle the file size. And that would mean loading all the software again, to say nothing of setting the personal preferences!

That thought alone is making me reluctant to purchase one.

It does sound a bargain compared with Hasselblad though.

Perhaps its meant to be a one frame camera, take one photo and upload to computer, process and print, delete file, start all over again.

[Donald]

Perhaps its meant to be a one frame camera, take one photo and upload to computer, process and print, delete file, start all over again.

No. The Raw files are about 59-60 Mb. Yep, it takes a little longer to transfer. But do we all need to live in the fast lane all the time?

[Shadowman]

No. The Raw files are about 59-60 Mb. Yep, it takes a little longer to transfer. But do we all need to live in the fast lane all the time?

Not really, but I can imagine the strain on a system and software if using multiple programs or editing multiple files.

[Donald]

The 5Ds is not as good in low light

I think a number of the hands-on reviews now being published are disputing that assertion.

The purpose of the 5DS is not to compete with those cameras that go to dizzying ISO levels (does anyone actually use those settings?). If you think you need that sort of thing, along with mega burst rates, etc, then don't go for a 5DS. On the other hand if you are content to stand in a field for hours at a time waiting for the light to be right and the clouds to be just perfect, then the 5DS may well be for you.

[DanK]

The Raw files are about 59-60 Mb.

So, when software requires converting to TIFF, 16-but TIFFs would be something like 300MB each. Am I right? And the PSD or TIFF files I get from photoshop, starting with my 5D3 or crop, are often that big, so the ones from this camera would be huge.

For those of us who stack images, this is more extreme yet. I often stack 15-20 images. Let's say 20, for round numbers. That would be 1.2 GB for the raw files, 9 GB for the initial TIFFs, and another 300MB for the composite. Now, take the 300MB composite and run it into photoshop.... And I end up with one flower. That;s a lot of storage as well as processing.

[William W]

Posts #12 & #13 make a helluva lot of sense.

The 5Ds is an highly sophisticated specialized tool, and will excel for specialized uses.

The 5Ds will work excessively well with; L Series Zooms; also L Primes; and also non-L Lenses.

For two examples cracker images could be made with the 5Ds and the EF 50 F/2.5 or the TS-S 90 F/2.8.

However the camera cannot overcome all the the intrinsic flaws that any one lens might have.

If the resultant image is of a lesser quality than the Photographer's Vision and the lenses used with the 5Ds are of a adequate and substantial standard of optical quality - then 99.9% of those "fall short" instances will be as a result of a limitation or error in the Photographer's Skill or Technique.

WW

[deetheturk]

Hi Donald, did yours arrive the other day? And if so, what are your initial thoughts on the beastie?

Cheers David