# 5Ds/r Officially announced, sample images posted



## rexbobcat

So the 5Ds/r was just offically announced by Canon. There have also been samples posted on the Canon Japan site: Canon EOS 5Ds Sample Images Movies

Looks promising so far. Yes they're JPEGs, but it doesn't seem worse than what I expected from a full frame sensor of this resolution.


----------



## tecboy

That is insane.  The first image, you can see the facial hair.


----------



## UjaiDidida

Wow! Very sharp!!


----------



## goooner

Guess it's more aimed at the studio with 50MP. I think where Canon has come up short recently would be DR and low light capabilities. With Pentax bringing out a FF soon, it will be interesting to see how they stack up.


----------



## iolair

8688 x 5792  ... insane levels of detail in those sample images.

Amazon.com say they'll have it for pre-order from 30th April:
Amazon.com Canon EOS 5DS Digital SLR Body Only Camera Photo
(shipping from June, I believe)


----------



## Forkie

I thought my D810 was insane at 36MP, but that's just unbelievable.  

It almost enough to make me consider the switch!*




*Almost.


----------



## goodguy

Forkie said:


> I thought my D810 was insane at 36MP, but that's just unbelievable.
> 
> It almost enough to make me consider the switch!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Almost.


 
Dont you worry the D820 is already being worked on and I am pretty sure it will have an even more insane sensor on it with probably 60MP or 70MP on it.

Ladies and Gentleman this is the Japanese muscle car style war of sensors, the moto is "Let See How Many MP We Can Cramp Onto One Silly Sensor", I bet in few years 100MP sensors will look rather normal.
I am not saying this is pointless for everybody, yes there will be those who will really make good use of this large resolution but come one even 36MP is stupidly huge resolution and poitless for most of us.


----------



## Forkie

goodguy said:


> Forkie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought my D810 was insane at 36MP, but that's just unbelievable.
> 
> It almost enough to make me consider the switch!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Almost.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont you worry the D820 is already being worked on and I am pretty sure it will have an even more insane sensor on it with probably 60MP or 70MP on it.
> 
> Ladies and Gentleman this is the Japanese muscle car style war of sensors, the moto is "Let See How Many MP We Can Cramp Onto One Silly Sensor", I bet in few years 100MP sensors will look rather normal.
> I am not saying this is pointless for everybody, yes there will be those who will really make good use of this large resolution but come one even 36MP is stupidly huge resolution and poitless for most of us.
Click to expand...


I know that MP at these levels is pointless for the vast majority of photographers, amateur or professional, and it was something I never really cared about until I started working in the studio, where clarity and detail became important to me in my photos.  

I'm certainly not saying a 50-60MP is better, let alone necessary (far from it), but for my own photography - resolution has gradually become more of a consideration for future potential camera body upgrades.

Plus, I also find it a little bit fascinating, shooting a portrait from 3-4 metres away and still being able to zoom in and see the eyelash follicles!


----------



## pgriz

The detail is impressive.  But. It also seems that we can't see the forest for the trees.  Do you really WANT to have a portrait so detailed?


----------



## runnah

The video is nothing new. Same as the mkiii.


----------



## goooner

runnah said:


> The video is nothing new. Same as the mkiii.


Yep, quite surprised that it does not have 4K. The R version also sounds quite interesting, with the option to 'remove' the low pass filter...


----------



## Mach0

With that resolution, it's not priced bad. Too much resolution for me though. The only think I'm looking forward to is the d810 dropping in price when nikon has a camera to compete with it. Even 36mp is too much for me but I like the extra features that aren't available on the lesser bodies. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Braineack

tecboy said:


> That is insane.  The first image, you can see the facial hair.


_
this is not saying about good/bad about the canon:_
okay?  any camera today could do that.

I just wish the samples all had more DOF...


_this may or may not be:
..._and the 5Ds/r had more DR--this camera is officially a studio queen.

MP is the only thing this camera is bringing [new] to the table.


----------



## runnah

Mach0 said:


> With that resolution, it's not priced bad. Too much resolution for me though. The only think I'm looking forward to is the d810 dropping in price when nikon has a camera to compete with it. Even 36mp is too much for me but I like the extra features that aren't available on the lesser bodies.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



I would tend to agree as 90% of the photos taken these days are squashed down to fit on the web. But I am glad this camera exists.


----------



## goodguy

Forkie said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Forkie said:
> 
> 
> 
> I thought my D810 was insane at 36MP, but that's just unbelievable.
> 
> It almost enough to make me consider the switch!*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Almost.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dont you worry the D820 is already being worked on and I am pretty sure it will have an even more insane sensor on it with probably 60MP or 70MP on it.
> 
> Ladies and Gentleman this is the Japanese muscle car style war of sensors, the moto is "Let See How Many MP We Can Cramp Onto One Silly Sensor", I bet in few years 100MP sensors will look rather normal.
> I am not saying this is pointless for everybody, yes there will be those who will really make good use of this large resolution but come one even 36MP is stupidly huge resolution and poitless for most of us.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know that MP at these levels is pointless for the vast majority of photographers, amateur or professional, and it was something I never really cared about until I started working in the studio, where clarity and detail became important to me in my photos.
> 
> I'm certainly not saying a 50-60MP is better, let alone necessary (far from it), but for my own photography - resolution has gradually become more of a consideration for future potential camera body upgrades.
> 
> Plus, I also find it a little bit fascinating, shooting a portrait from 3-4 metres away and still being able to zoom in and see the eyelash follicles!
Click to expand...

No doubt some will find 50MP useful but only few, for most its and over, over kill.
Neither Canon, Sony or Nikon care though if its useful or not, they care about selling cameras, if people will buy Mega MP cameras in large amounts then there is justification to produce these cameras so the proof is in the numbers and I have a feeling there will be plenty of people buying these Mega MP cameras because no doubt the numbers are impressive, for those people the usefulness of these MP is beside the point as long as its impressive


----------



## Overread

It's overkil for most but then this isn't going for your 35mm market - this camera is aiming at the studio photographer who wants to go medium format and can't afford to.
I suspect we'll see more 50mp cameras in the future; but I hope that Canon and the others hold back and let computer tech catch up (ergo we need 10TB harddrives to be as cheap as 2TB ones are now and processes a lot faster) otherwise they'll just mp themselves out of the computer side of things. 


The detail is impressive and honestly I'd love a sensor I could crop that much for wildlife!


----------



## iolair

As above; this is a specialised camera for professionals producing billboard style images, or huge and detailed landscape canvases.

I already find 24MP a bit overkill on my K-3 ... not to mention the 30MB raw files it produces.  The extra detail/size is only very occasionally useful.  Presumably this Canon will produce RAW files over 60MB each.


----------



## Scatterbrained

goooner said:


> Guess it's more aimed at the studio with 50MP. I think where Canon has come up short recently would be DR and low light capabilities. With Pentax bringing out a FF soon, it will be interesting to see how they stack up.


At higher ISO (low light) is where Canon is still in the lead.  The DR issue has to do with low Iso DR, where Canon is behind Nikon and Sony.   At high Iso they still have better DR (with the exception of the new A7s, which has it's own IQ issues).


----------



## runnah

I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.


----------



## Scatterbrained

goooner said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> The video is nothing new. Same as the mkiii.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, quite surprised that it does not have 4K. The R version also sounds quite interesting, with the option to 'remove' the low pass filter...
Click to expand...

One thing I see over and over is the "it doesn't even have  4k".  Who cares?  This clearly isn't targeted towards video shooters, as is proven by the other specs.  It also isn't replacing the 5DIII either.   It's a new camera aimed at people who would like to move up to MF for studio/landscape/architectural work but can't swing the price tag.     They even state this outright in the press release.    Granted the DR issue may prove to be a deal killer, but I'm truly interested in seeing the effects of the strengthened color filter array.   Better color rendition is always a good thing.


----------



## Scatterbrained

runnah said:


> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.


Agreed, especially when you make your own light.


----------



## Overread

runnah said:


> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.



Thing is cameras are so darn good overall that we really are left with low light being one of the core problem areas where we see the most net potential gain. 

That said some, like myself, always want to see more gain in low light because we shoot action. Needing ISO 12800 and still being a touch underexposed to shoot action and you really do want every bit of ISO you can get and ever increase in quality.


----------



## runnah

Overread said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thing is cameras are so darn good overall that we really are left with low light being one of the core problem areas where we see the most net potential gain.
> 
> That said some, like myself, always want to see more gain in low light because we shoot action. Needing ISO 12800 and still being a touch underexposed to shoot action and you really do want every bit of ISO you can get and ever increase in quality.
Click to expand...



There comes a point where you have to either add light or add stability. Shooting sports in a dark gym is never going to look great, even with an extremely high ISO.


----------



## Forkie

Overread said:


> It's overkil for most but then this isn't going for your 35mm market - this camera is aiming at the studio photographer who wants to go medium format and can't afford to.
> I suspect we'll see more 50mp cameras in the future; but I hope that Canon and the others hold back and let computer tech catch up (ergo we need 10TB harddrives to be as cheap as 2TB ones are now and processes a lot faster) otherwise they'll just mp themselves out of the computer side of things.
> 
> 
> The detail is impressive and honestly I'd love a sensor I could crop that much for wildlife!



Absolutely agree on your comment about space.  Since I got the D810, I've filled up my laptop's entire harddrive with just 3 photoshoots worth of RAW images and had to by another external harddrive to store them on.  I've done that TWICE now!


----------



## photoguy99

Some day the camera will build a real time hyper accurate 3d model of what it's looking at, with virtual lights added, and photograph that.

Then with the built in Wi-Fi you'll be able to share this on Facebook over the moon based global wireless network


----------



## Forkie

photoguy99 said:


> Some day the camera will build a real time hyper accurate 3d model of what it's looking at, with virtual lights added, and photograph that.
> 
> Then with the built in Wi-Fi you'll be able to share this on Facebook over the moon based global wireless network



Make this for me NOW!


----------



## gsgary

runnah said:


> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.


It is to Nikon owners thats all they go on about apart from DR, how often do you look at a print in a gallery and say "just look at the DR in that shot" [emoji3]


----------



## runnah

gsgary said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> It is to Nikon owners thats all they go on about apart from DR, how often do you look at a print in a gallery and say "just look at the DR in that shot" [emoji3]
Click to expand...


About as often as I get a usable shot at max ISO.


----------



## gsgary

runnah said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> It is to Nikon owners thats all they go on about apart from DR, how often do you look at a print in a gallery and say "just look at the DR in that shot" [emoji3]
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> About as often as I get a usable shot at max ISO.
Click to expand...

If there is no good light the shot is not worth taking and if your not getting paid to shoot in a dark gym there is no point, the only reason I shot in low light was I was getting paid


----------



## Scatterbrained

Forkie said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's overkil for most but then this isn't going for your 35mm market - this camera is aiming at the studio photographer who wants to go medium format and can't afford to.
> I suspect we'll see more 50mp cameras in the future; but I hope that Canon and the others hold back and let computer tech catch up (ergo we need 10TB harddrives to be as cheap as 2TB ones are now and processes a lot faster) otherwise they'll just mp themselves out of the computer side of things.
> 
> 
> The detail is impressive and honestly I'd love a sensor I could crop that much for wildlife!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely agree on your comment about space.  Since I got the D810, I've filled up my laptop's entire harddrive with just 3 photoshoots worth of RAW images and had to by another external harddrive to store them on.  I've done that TWICE now!
Click to expand...

Why are you putting your image files right on your C drive?    Get a good RAID enclosure, stuff it with memory and be done with it.


----------



## Trever1t

Canon's answer to the Nikon's D800 series. Yes, it was inevitable with the Nikon's popularity that Canon produce a studio/portrait/landscape body and reclaim their position in the industry. Not Canon or Nikon fanboy, just stating the marketing objective as I see it. 

Now, who needs 50mp? I never thought I'd want 36.3mp but there it is, I love it. Will 50 be better? Are we reaching the saturation point of pixel density? 

I sure hope Nikon doesn't release a D820 anytime soon, crappers, I just shelled out for the 810!


----------



## Scatterbrained

Trever1t said:


> Canon's answer to the Nikon's D800 series. Yes, it was inevitable with the Nikon's popularity that Canon produce a studio/portrait/landscape body and reclaim their position in the industry. Not Canon or Nikon fanboy, just stating the marketing objective as I see it.
> 
> Now, who needs 50mp? I never thought I'd want 36.3mp but there it is, I love it. Will 50 be better? Are we reaching the saturation point of pixel density?
> 
> I sure hope Nikon doesn't release a D820 anytime soon, crappers, I just shelled out for the 810!


Considering the excitement the latest round of 50mp medium format cameras generated, I'd imagine there are a few out there how see the need.


----------



## Trever1t

I'm sure of it and wouldn't be surprised if some D800+ users give it a tryout.


----------



## ronlane

Trever1t said:


> I'm sure of it and wouldn't be surprised if some D800+ users give it a tryout.



Heck Trever, I want to try them out and I shoot landscape, sports, wildlife. (heck pretty much anything but studio and portraits)


----------



## ronlane

Okay, I've been looking at the reviews and videos about these cameras. I am seeing where most are positioning this as a studio/portrait/landscape camera. Only once did I see someone questions the 1.3x and 1.x6x in camera crop factor and the they also mentioned the sRaw and mRaw file sizes.

This got me to thinking, could Canon really want this to be another all around camera like the 5D mk III was? I mean sure with 50mp, it's going to be good at portraits, landscape and such. But with 2 - Digic 6 processors and the ability to crop to 1.6x and shoot a mRaw of about 24mp, wouldn't this be the same as the 7D mkII except for the 5pfs difference?

With that thought and the fact that a lot of people shoot sports with the 5D mk III, I would say that these 2 cameras will be able to handle it as well.

Besides image that 50mp file of your favorite athlete captured doing what they do best.


----------



## photoguy99

If they'd build pixel binning in, it might have somewhat broader appeal.

Full frame RAWs with 25mpix, or 16mpix. Increased image quality in a manageable file size. Sure, you can do it in post, but not everyone wants to slosh 100s or 1000s of 80M files all over tarnation in the first place.


----------



## gsgary

I've still got my first 1D 4 mp's thats enough for anyone, I think it's 20 years old now and I would still put it up against any new camera for focus speed and accuracy


----------



## runnah

photoguy99 said:


> If they'd build pixel binning in, it might have somewhat broader appeal.
> 
> Full frame RAWs with 25mpix, or 16mpix. Increased image quality in a manageable file size. Sure, you can do it in post, but not everyone wants to slosh 100s or 1000s of 80M files all over tarnation in the first place.



It does that.


----------



## Scatterbrained

ronlane said:


> Okay, I've been looking at the reviews and videos about these cameras. I am seeing where most are positioning this as a studio/portrait/landscape camera. Only once did I see someone questions the 1.3x and 1.x6x in camera crop factor and the they also mentioned the sRaw and mRaw file sizes.
> 
> This got me to thinking, could Canon really want this to be another all around camera like the 5D mk III was? I mean sure with 50mp, it's going to be good at portraits, landscape and such. But with 2 - Digic 6 processors and the ability to crop to 1.6x and shoot a mRaw of about 24mp, wouldn't this be the same as the 7D mkII except for the 5pfs difference?
> 
> With that thought and the fact that a lot of people shoot sports with the 5D mk III, I would say that these 2 cameras will be able to handle it as well.
> 
> Besides image that 50mp file of your favorite athlete captured doing what they do best.


Personally I think Canon knows who they are targeting with this camera.    Someone who sees a need for a medium format back for studio work (or architectural work, or landscape) but they can't swing the dosh to move up (20k for a camera + 5-10k per lens, yikes).   Imagine that same person may also like to take the camera out of the studio to go and shoot their kids soccer game, or the family Christmas party.   It's geared towards people who want/need the resolution, but maybe don't need it all the time.  

Personally, I feel like this camera is right up my alley, although I think I'll wait till I can get my hands on some raw files to see if the sensor is worth the upgrade, otherwise I'll just move over to an A7R.


----------



## photoguy99

runnah said:


> photoguy99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If they'd build pixel binning in, it might have somewhat broader appeal.
> 
> Full frame RAWs with 25mpix, or 16mpix. Increased image quality in a manageable file size. Sure, you can do it in post, but not everyone wants to slosh 100s or 1000s of 80M files all over tarnation in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does that.
Click to expand...


Awesome. Someone at Canon is paying attention.


----------



## Scatterbrained

photoguy99 said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> photoguy99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If they'd build pixel binning in, it might have somewhat broader appeal.
> 
> Full frame RAWs with 25mpix, or 16mpix. Increased image quality in a manageable file size. Sure, you can do it in post, but not everyone wants to slosh 100s or 1000s of 80M files all over tarnation in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Awesome. Someone at Canon is paying attention.
Click to expand...

The mRaw and sRaw options have been around for a while.    My 5DII has them (although I've never used them).


----------



## runnah

Scatterbrained said:


> photoguy99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> photoguy99 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If they'd build pixel binning in, it might have somewhat broader appeal.
> 
> Full frame RAWs with 25mpix, or 16mpix. Increased image quality in a manageable file size. Sure, you can do it in post, but not everyone wants to slosh 100s or 1000s of 80M files all over tarnation in the first place.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It does that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Awesome. Someone at Canon is paying attention.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The mRaw and sRaw options have been around for a while.    My 5DII has them (although I've never used them).
Click to expand...


Yup, tho this does have crop sensor modes as well.


----------



## rexbobcat

ronlane said:


> Okay, I've been looking at the reviews and videos about these cameras. I am seeing where most are positioning this as a studio/portrait/landscape camera. Only once did I see someone questions the 1.3x and 1.x6x in camera crop factor and the they also mentioned the sRaw and mRaw file sizes.
> 
> This got me to thinking, could Canon really want this to be another all around camera like the 5D mk III was? I mean sure with 50mp, it's going to be good at portraits, landscape and such. But with 2 - Digic 6 processors and the ability to crop to 1.6x and shoot a mRaw of about 24mp, wouldn't this be the same as the 7D mkII except for the 5pfs difference?
> 
> With that thought and the fact that a lot of people shoot sports with the 5D mk III, I would say that these 2 cameras will be able to handle it as well.
> 
> Besides image that 50mp file of your favorite athlete captured doing what they do best.



From what I've read, people are thinking that Canon will be segmenting the 5D line.

Even with the crop modes you're still at the mercy of the sensor limitations in terms of ISO range and the amount of noise.

Logic dictates that a camera with a native 20MP will outperform the crop from a higher resolution sensor with smaller, denser pixels.

Then again, it's all hypothetical until we can  see the cameras in action so...Who knows...


----------



## goodguy

runnah said:


> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.


Personal, for me it is extremely important, main reason I went FF and I still find myself many times wanting more, much more, much much more!
I said in the past when I will have a camera which shoots at 400000ISO same quality as current cameras shoot 100ISO I will be happy...............maybe 
Again me!


----------



## goodguy

Overread said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thing is cameras are so darn good overall that we really are left with low light being one of the core problem areas where we see the most net potential gain.
> 
> That said some, like myself, always want to see more gain in low light because we shoot action. Needing ISO 12800 and still being a touch underexposed to shoot action and you really do want every bit of ISO you can get and ever increase in quality.
Click to expand...

Hallelujah, exactly!
Grain is not the only problem, loss of detail in high ISO is really painful too.


----------



## runnah

ronlane said:


> This got me to thinking, could Canon really want this to be another all around camera like the 5D mk III was? I mean sure with 50mp, it's going to be good at portraits, landscape and such. But with 2 - Digic 6 processors and the ability to crop to 1.6x and shoot a mRaw of about 24mp, wouldn't this be the same as the 7D mkII except for the 5pfs difference?



It's designed for people who are only going to be shooting certain types of subject. We should all be thankful that camera companies are making cameras designed for a specific end user and cater them so well.

Hold on for the 5dmk4 which is already going to be the "all around" camera.


----------



## ronlane

@runnah, that is the camera I am wanting to see the specs on before I go to full frame. Here's to hoping that it will have dual digic6 processors, about 25 mp and 8-10 fps with the same focusing system of these 2 5d's.


----------



## photoguy99

rexbobcat said:


> Logic dictates that a camera with a native 20MP will outperform the crop from a higher resolution sensor with smaller, denser pixels.



Surprisingly, this is not necessarily the case. In the land of audio they've been using the equivalent of tons and tons and tons of terrible pixels, for years and years, because it's better. Nokia went with a 41mpix sensor and pixel binning for the same reasons, more or less.[/QUOTE]


----------



## spiralout462

These models may very well be for  a "specific" market but I found it interesting that the sample images include a portrait, a landscape, and a beautiful, extremely detailed bird.  Those subjects cover a very large range of photographers.


----------



## TreeofLifeStairs

photoguy99 said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> 
> Logic dictates that a camera with a native 20MP will outperform the crop from a higher resolution sensor with smaller, denser pixels.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Surprisingly, this is not necessarily the case. In the land of audio they've been using the equivalent of tons and tons and tons of terrible pixels, for years and years, because it's better. Nokia went with a 41mpix sensor and pixel binning for the same reasons, more or less.
Click to expand...

[/QUOTE]
How much more is tons and tons and tons over say just tons and tons?


----------



## waday

TreeofLifeStairs said:


> How much more is tons and tons and tons over say just tons and tons?


I believe one set of tons.


----------



## Scatterbrained

waday said:


> TreeofLifeStairs said:
> 
> 
> 
> How much more is tons and tons and tons over say just tons and tons?
> 
> 
> 
> I believe one set of tons.
Click to expand...

Which, according to my conversion calculator, is one metric buttload.


----------



## waday

Scatterbrained said:


> waday said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TreeofLifeStairs said:
> 
> 
> 
> How much more is tons and tons and tons over say just tons and tons?
> 
> 
> 
> I believe one set of tons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Which, according to my conversion calculator, is one metric buttload.
Click to expand...

That's a technical term, right? Oh, metric system.


----------



## photoguy99

Well, the PCM4202, just as a for instance, uses between 32x and 128x oversampling.


----------



## JacaRanda

Also looking out for the 6D MII.   Just a little curious.


----------



## Overread

spiralout462 said:


> These models may very well be for  a "specific" market but I found it interesting that the sample images include a portrait, a landscape, and a beautiful, extremely detailed bird.  Those subjects cover a very large range of photographers.



But of course, build it for a specific market but don't deny other markets the desire to owning one - because chances are you will net yourself some sales. This camera would be fantastic for wildlife in good lighting and the cropping capacity might even make some use it and crop over using a teleconverter (that way they save a few stops of light).


----------



## gsgary

goodguy said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thing is cameras are so darn good overall that we really are left with low light being one of the core problem areas where we see the most net potential gain.
> 
> That said some, like myself, always want to see more gain in low light because we shoot action. Needing ISO 12800 and still being a touch underexposed to shoot action and you really do want every bit of ISO you can get and ever increase in quality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hallelujah, exactly!
> Grain is not the only problem, loss of detail in high ISO is really painful too.
Click to expand...

Do you shoot film no lovely grain in digital only horrible noise


----------



## gsgary

goodguy said:


> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thing is cameras are so darn good overall that we really are left with low light being one of the core problem areas where we see the most net potential gain.
> 
> That said some, like myself, always want to see more gain in low light because we shoot action. Needing ISO 12800 and still being a touch underexposed to shoot action and you really do want every bit of ISO you can get and ever increase in quality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hallelujah, exactly!
> Grain is not the only problem, loss of detail in high ISO is really painful too.
Click to expand...




gsgary said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overread said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> I really wish people would stop prattling on about low light, it's not the be all end all when it comes to cameras.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thing is cameras are so darn good overall that we really are left with low light being one of the core problem areas where we see the most net potential gain.
> 
> That said some, like myself, always want to see more gain in low light because we shoot action. Needing ISO 12800 and still being a touch underexposed to shoot action and you really do want every bit of ISO you can get and ever increase in quality.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hallelujah, exactly!
> Grain is not the only problem, loss of detail in high ISO is really painful too.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you shoot film mo lovely grain in digital only horrible noise
Click to expand...


----------



## Philmar

I imagine you put any new iteration of a DSLR out there and regardless of the incremental improvement you'll always find gearheads that will buy it because of the improved specs.

That said, I imagine I'd be in for that camera if I ever wanted to rent billboard space and hang up one of my photos.


----------



## ronlane

Why does it have to be just billboards? Use these images to make wraps for your car. Example, take a photo of a yellow Lambo and make it into a wrap for my Jeep wrangler, lol.


----------



## waday

ronlane said:


> Why does it have to be just billboards? Use these images to make wraps for your car. Example, take a photo of a yellow Lambo and make it into a wrap for my Jeep wrangler, lol.


Get the best of both worlds:
Lamborghini LM002 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

I had no idea that Lamborghini actually made an SUV for a short period of time until I saw it in a book probably 15 years ago. A little more than 300 produced in a 5 year period.


----------



## ronlane

That's nice waday. Still cheaper to shoot and wrap mine. That way I don't have to cry too much if something happens to the wrap. lol


----------



## thereyougo!

goooner said:


> Guess it's more aimed at the studio with 50MP. I think where Canon has come up short recently would be DR and low light capabilities. With Pentax bringing out a FF soon, it will be interesting to see how they stack up.



The 5D mk III is good at low light.  I switched from it, not because of it's low light capabilities, which are considerable, but because of its low ISO noise banding which made it pretty unusable for landscapes, bearing in mind the relatively low dynamic range.  Yes you can bracket and use HDR or blending, but when other manufacturers can design a sensor and a camera where you can get a believable and non noise photograph from a single shot, why would you risk getting Looney Tunes from a HDR programme?

Comments rom Canon are that Dynamic Range and noise handling are the same as 5D3.  So you can see the noise banding at 100 - 400 ISO even bigger.  In a UK quiz show host's words, "Super, Smashing, Great!".....ummmm NOT!


----------



## crzyfotopeeple

F-it. It the 5d mk iii ain't good enuf. Then you ain't taking pictures.
​


----------



## ruifo

Tony Northup has released a new youtube video projecting the new 5D DXO scores...
His own speculation, nothing else...

He came up with this:






Source

See more here:




 (6min 49sec onwards)

I'm happy with the 5Ds/r anouncements.


----------



## runnah

ruifo said:


> Tony Northup has released a new youtube video projecting the new 5D DXO scores...
> His own speculation, nothing else...
> 
> He came up with this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source
> 
> See more here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (6min 49sec onwards)
> 
> I'm happy with the 5Ds/r anouncements.



What a silly thing to do.


----------



## photoguy99

I think it will get an overall score of 50000000.


----------



## Overread

Well he's smart! A DXO score is hotly debated when its real; a projected one from someone else - gah he'll get hammered on his site but he'll do storming well publicity wise


----------



## Braineack

runnah said:


> ruifo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tony Northup has released a new youtube video projecting the new 5D DXO scores...
> His own speculation, nothing else...
> 
> He came up with this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source
> 
> See more here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (6min 49sec onwards)
> 
> I'm happy with the 5Ds/r anouncements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a silly thing to do.
Click to expand...


I bet his video makes him more money than this post you.


----------



## runnah

Braineack said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ruifo said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tony Northup has released a new youtube video projecting the new 5D DXO scores...
> His own speculation, nothing else...
> 
> He came up with this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Source
> 
> See more here:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (6min 49sec onwards)
> 
> I'm happy with the 5Ds/r anouncements.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What a silly thing to do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I bet his video makes him more money than this post you.
Click to expand...


Probably, but my facial hair connects so I have that going for me.


----------



## runnah

Overread said:


> Well he's smart! A DXO score is hotly debated when its real; a projected one from someone else - gah he'll get hammered on his site but he'll do storming well publicity wise



Only by camera fondlers and people you'd not want to talk with at a party.


----------



## crzyfotopeeple

Sorry. Not really sure what i meant. Think i had too many ipa's that night.


----------



## dolina

For those who reserved what will you be using the 5DS or 5DS R for? Wildlife? Birds? Landscape? Studio?


----------



## goooner

I went to a demo of these at our local shop. Was not really impressed tbh. It is aimed at studio and probably landscapes. Not very good in low light, but can compare it medium format in MP.


----------

