Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras
Thread started 27 Jun 2015 (Saturday) 13:43
Prev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

5D III, 5DS or 1DX

 
AJSJones
Goldmember
AJSJones's Avatar
Joined Dec 2001
California
Jun 30, 2015 13:54 |  #16

David Arbogast wrote in post #17615899 (external link)
OK, 5 FPS with a quick-to-fill buffer might be a deal killer, but let me put it this way: who do you want to go to bat for you? A big powerful home run slugger with 50MP muscles that knocks in home run after home run, but also gets thrown out a lot because he only runs 5fps? Or do you want the little guy that bats for high average, runs the bases at 10 fps, but doesn't knock it out of the park with regularity because his 18MP muscles are too weak?

Hehe, don't take me too seriously; it's how I see it, but I absolutely respect and admire the other options as well. :)

You might need to translate that into cricket for the UK members:D


My picture galleriesexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
David Arbogast's Avatar
10,138 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Joined Aug 2010
West Point, Georgia
Post has been edited over 2 years ago by David Arbogast.
Jun 30, 2015 14:26 |  #17

AJSJones wrote in post #17615972 (external link)
You might need to translate that into cricket for the UK members:D

I know virtually nothing about cricket, but I recently listened to Bill Bryson's (audio) book on his travels in Australia. He has a hilarious take on cricket. Here is a bit of it:

It is not true that the English invented cricket as a way of making all other human endeavours look interesting and lively; that was merely an unintended side-effect. I don't wish to denigrate a sport that is enjoyed by millions, some of them awake and facing the right way, but it is an odd game. It is the only sport that incorporates meal breaks. It is the only sport that shares its name with an insect. It is the only sport in which spectators burn as many calories as players (more if they are moderately restless). It is the only competitive activity of any type, other than perhaps baking, in which you can dress in white from head to toe and be as clean at the end of the day as you were at the beginning.

More of it here: http://www.wandererscr​icket.com/Yank_view.ht​ml (external link)

Sorry for the off topic, but couldn't resist as I had just listened to that last week. :lol:


David | Flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
AJSJones's Avatar
Joined Dec 2001
California
Jun 30, 2015 17:35 |  #18

David Arbogast wrote in post #17616006 (external link)
I know virtually nothing about cricket, but I recently listened to Bill Bryson's (audio) book on his travels in Australia. He has a hilarious take on cricket. Here is a bit of it:

More of it here: http://www.wandererscr​icket.com/Yank_view.ht​ml (external link)

Sorry for the off topic, but couldn't resist as I had just listened to that last week. :lol:

I (as someone who grew up in the UK and moved to the US) enjoy Bryson, but his take on cricket is woefully out of date, with Twenty20 and lots of action usually creating more action and being more engaging than one of the most exciting baseball games (a no-hitter) where nothing much happens - and that's why it's good.:D

(The cricket analogy would be something like comparing a batsman who can swing the bat hard and gets lots of boundaries but often misses and gets out quickly, while the other one is a slow and methodical batsman who ends up with more runs/inning and takes a long time over it).


My picture galleriesexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott_online
Senior Member
Joined Aug 2009
Jun 30, 2015 19:10 |  #19

AJSJones wrote in post #17616187 (external link)
I (as someone who grew up in the UK and moved to the US) enjoy Bryson, but his take on cricket is woefully out of date, with Twenty20 and lots of action usually creating more action and being more engaging than one of the most exciting baseball games (a no-hitter) where nothing much happens - and that's why it's good.:D

(The cricket analogy would be something like comparing a batsman who can swing the bat hard and gets lots of boundaries but often misses and gets out quickly, while the other one is a slow and methodical batsman who ends up with more runs/inning and takes a long time over it).

Of course bad light would stop play in the 7D2 vs 5DS match. ;-)a


flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Quack ­ Me ­ Up
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
210 posts
Joined Nov 2011
Rogers, MN
Jun 30, 2015 21:17 |  #20

Thanks for all the input. I want to get a full frame for a second body as of now but I'm not ruling out a 7D mkII in the future. I haven't been keeping up on the 7D mk ii's focus issue forum to see what the latest consensus is as to if it's a real problem or more user error but I will read up on that.




LOG IN TO REPLY
smythie
I wasn't even trying
Joined Jun 2009
Sydney - Australia
Jul 01, 2015 02:55 |  #21

From what I've seen of highish ISO shots from the 5DS/R (up to 6400) I don't see it being any worse than the 5D3. Couple with more than double the resolution it is IMO a much better body for just about anything. Its only drawbacks for me in comparison to the 5D3 are price and file sizes. So for me it is between the 5DS/R and 1DX.

If I was only shooting wildlife (where I wouldn't be filling the buffer with any regularity) and no motorsports, track and field or similar I'd find it very hard to select the 1DX over the 5DS/R.

The 1DX does offer a couple of points which I would really like though: faster AF acquisition and nicer (for me) ergonomics, plus of course the faster shot rate and larger buffer. For me personally the larger weight of the 1DX is a moot point - I'd be gripping the 5DS/R anyway and from my experience with Nikon bodies I wouldn't be surprised to read the 5DS/R with accessory grip is actually heavier and bigger than the 1DX. And it'll still be less ergonomic.


Gear List

LOG IN TO REPLY
Quack ­ Me ­ Up
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
210 posts
Joined Nov 2011
Rogers, MN
Post has been edited over 2 years ago by Quack Me Up.
Jul 01, 2015 10:05 |  #22

In all honesty, high ISO performance is not a big deal to me as I seldom find myself shooting over 1200 and prefer to keep it lower if possible. I'm not saying I wouldn't like it to be good at higher iso's as maybe I'd venture into that realm if the camera is good at it. So the old adage " more megapixels equals more noise" doesn't seem to be true so far with the 5DS?




LOG IN TO REPLY
Perfectly ­ Frank
I'm too sexy for my lens
Joined Oct 2010
Jul 01, 2015 10:26 |  #23

mfingar wrote in post #17612804 (external link)
The 5DS has proven useful capturing birds in flight, I think it'll be an interesting airshow body.

Yes, airshow body. I'm interested in how it will work for aircraft in flight.


My flickr albums (external link)
My Best Aviation Photos (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
David ­ Arbogast
Cream of the Crop
David Arbogast's Avatar
10,138 posts
Gallery: 35 photos
Joined Aug 2010
West Point, Georgia
Jul 01, 2015 10:34 |  #24

Quack Me Up wrote in post #17616850 (external link)
...So the old adage " more megapixels equals more noise" doesn't seem to be true so far with the 5DS?

I think that is a fair assessment.

I've been watching Lloyd Chamber's review of the 5DS and 5DS R with interest (it is a fee-subscription based review site), and he has documented that the noise level of the 5DS matches that of the 5D III at their respective resolutions. The result is that if you then down-sample the 5DS image to match the 5D III's 22-MP resolution, the 5DS image is cleaner and retains greater detail.

Even better, the 5DS images do not have the ugly pattern noise lurking in the shadows that the 5D III suffers from.


David | Flickr (external link)

LOG IN TO REPLY
Quack ­ Me ­ Up
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
210 posts
Joined Nov 2011
Rogers, MN
Jul 02, 2015 21:38 |  #25

Finding some interesting posts about how huge the files are from the 5DS, no surprise, and how it could pose a problem for those of us with "not so huge" amounts of memory and hard drive space when it comes to processing those huge files. Definitely a consideration to throw into the mix.




LOG IN TO REPLY
AJSJones
Goldmember
AJSJones's Avatar
Joined Dec 2001
California
Jul 03, 2015 00:52 |  #26

Quack Me Up wrote in post #17618638 (external link)
Finding some interesting posts about how huge the files are from the 5DS, no surprise, and how it could pose a problem for those of us with "not so huge" amounts of memory and hard drive space when it comes to processing those huge files. Definitely a consideration to throw into the mix.

Luckily, RAM and HD costs have dropped at the same time as sensor MPs have gone up, so yes you need to upgrade the truck if you are hauling bigger loads:D


My picture galleriesexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Apfelbeisser
Member
Joined May 2014
Jul 03, 2015 02:45 |  #27

I would go for 1DX because

- fps, fps, fps
- best autofocus system ever
- very good ISO capacities (very usable to ISO 6400), up to ISO 800 you can recover shadows and so.
- render of color and the look is unique
- amazing custom settings (you can switch fast into TV mode with 1/20 to go along with bird with this effect, you just need to set on a button and voila!)

And I don't work for Canon. And yes, I own 1DX and I'm so happy!




LOG IN TO REPLY
Neilyb
Cream of the Crop
Neilyb's Avatar
Joined Sep 2005
Munich
Jul 03, 2015 03:55 |  #28

I rarely find I need the FPS, in fact I pretty much have never used 10fps. The only time was when pre-focussing and shooting when a bird approached to get that landing shot (the D4s has a focus mode that detects when something is in focus and fires).

5-7fps seems to be a sweet spot for wildlife and BIF, shooting at 10fps I really do find the AF struggles and the number of missed shots increase more than exponentially.


http://natureimmortal.​blogspot.comexternal link

http://www.natureimmor​tal.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Quack ­ Me ­ Up
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
210 posts
Joined Nov 2011
Rogers, MN
Jul 11, 2015 14:35 |  #29

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #17613858 (external link)
Sell the 7D, buy 7D2 and 5D3 :)

Starting to look like a good possible option. When it comes to the 1DX vs 5Diii, do you think the 1DX has a noticeable edge in low light and low contrast situations as far as achieving and keeping focus? I'm just trying to see if the 1DX is worth the extra money and in what areas it would hold a definite advantage over the 5DIII. Frames per second difference is of no concern to me
Thanks.




LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)

4,834 views & 4 likes for this thread
5D III, 5DS or 1DX
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras


Not a member yet? Click here to register to the forums.
Registered members get all the features: search, following threads, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, settings, view hosted photos, own reviews and more...


AAA

Send feedback to staff    •   Jump to forum...    •   Rules    •   Index    •   New posts    •   RTAT    •   'Best of'    •   Gallery    •   Gear    •   Reviews    •   Polls

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Privacy policy and cookie usage info.

POWERED BY AMASS 1.4version 1.4
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net
Spent 0.00821 for 6 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.09s
Latest registered member is Wanda Donald
782 guests, 407 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017