OFFICIAL : 5DS and 5DS R Announced

I think I am getting what people are saying. The 5D3 must be much worse than the 6D or I just haven't run into that many instances where my camera has struggled.

marq4porsche wrote in post #17427711
I think I am getting what people are saying. The 5D3 must be much worse than the 6D or I just haven't run into that many instances where my camera has struggled.

the camera doesn't struggle unless you struggle.

(i mean that in the most constructive, nicest way )

marq4porsche wrote in post #17427700
Sorry I don't have an example where the darks are full black but I've been plenty successful recovering my darks.

Looking at the 'before' image, and knowing that it's an overcast sunrise/sunset, I can guarantee that that particular example has less than 9 stops of DR.

sploo wrote in post #17427704
There are already some good replies (with specific examples on scenes that would cause problems), so I won't comment on that. Your point above though is perfectly valid - the "right" exposure is completely about what the photographer (as an artist) wants to achieve. If you want to keep detail in bright areas (stop them clipping) but there are also areas in the scene that are much darker, that's when problems occur. If the artistic decision is that certain highlights aren't important to the scene (or you specifically want darker areas to be silhouetted) then there's a little less pressure on the sensor's DR capability.

That's why I had little difficulty in this shot with the 5D2, despite the huge dynamic range of the scene - it worked better for the trees to be silhouetted:

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Shadowblade wrote in post #17427731
That's why I had little difficulty in this shot with the 5D2, despite the huge dynamic range of the scene - it worked better for the trees to be silhouetted:

Love that shot - the colours are lovely.

Looks like Cuba?

Submariner wrote in post #17427822
Love that shot - the colours are lovely.

Looks like Cuba?

India

I love it when Shadowblade starts busting out the photos--makes the whole thing worth while.

Some people get it, some people don't. Some people care and others don't. But it's no longer up for debate that Canon are far behind in terms of DR, and that for particular shooting scenarios this can pose a problem. Whether it matters for you only you can decide.

I'm sure the 5DS/R will be a wonderful all-around camera, but sadly it seems Canon still haven't made strides in the one area they were lagging in the most.

50 MP is going to be fantastic for capturing detail. DPReview gave a demo of the Olympus OM-D EM-5 II's 40 MP high-res mode. It was stunning the change in detail between normal and high-rez modes, plus the ability to sample each color channel in the same pixel location giving better color accuracy. It's definately a mode for static subjects and for use on a tripod to get the most out of it, but I would expect a similar level of detail capture from a 5Ds/r which some people are going to love.

Poe wrote in post #17428183
50 MP is going to be fantastic for capturing detail. DPReview gave a demo of the Olympus OM-D EM-5 II's 40 MP high-res mode. It was stunning the change in detail between normal and high-rez modes, plus the ability to sample each color channel in the same pixel location giving better color accuracy. It's definately a mode for static subjects and for use on a tripod to get the most out of it, but I would expect a similar level of detail capture from a 5Ds/r which some people are going to love.

but if we cant recover highlights and darks then that will put a damper on the camera

sploo wrote in post #17426931
Remember that there's a lot of differences there; the 5D3 sensor has over two and half times larger surface area vs. the 7D2. Against that, others have pointed out that the noise characteristic of the 7D2 sensor is much better (i.e. more random). While Canon sensors suffer from more low ISO noise (that affects the darker areas) the killer has been that the noise has been in visible patterns (banding); which makes it much more obtrusive (and further renders lower stops unusable). The 7D2 appears to have improved the latter problem vs. the 5D3 quite considerably (and the 5D3 itself was quite a bit better than the original 7D).

I'm still just wanting to see some independent testing of the 5DS DR, as until we get that it's all just speculation.

High ISO noise is really about pixel size, smaller pixels gather less light.
Now obviously if you reduce the size of pixels in a full frame camera to the same size as pixels in a crop camera you are going to have similar noise performance to a crop camera. The 5Ds is sacrificing high ISO performance for resolution. But for many people this is a better compromise.

marq4porsche wrote in post #17427385
Sorry to come into this topic so late. The issue of dynamic range seems a bit blown out of proportion to me. Why would I ever underexpose my shots like that. If we're taking landscape photography as a prime reason to have more dynamic range then I would never have this problem. With landscapes I usually use a tripod so I can easily get a proper exposure no mater what light was available. I can see the point about bringing out shadow detail, but for me, as long as I'm shooting in decent light I don't have a problem pulling out shadow detail that I want from my 6D. If this 5Ds is anything like the 6D then I think it'll be fine for landscapes. Plus they said they cleaned up their processes so the noise issue should be better.

Obviously you don't shoot landscape or architecture. Parts of the shot that you want can easily be this dark, think about a dim landscape at sunset under a bright sky. Or the sunny top of a skyscraper and the shadowed and dim street.

Mornnb wrote in post #17428311
High ISO noise is really about pixel size, smaller pixels gather less light.
Now obviously if you reduce the size of pixels in a full frame camera to the same size as pixels in a crop camera you are going to have similar noise performance to a crop camera. The 5Ds is sacrificing high ISO performance for resolution. But for many people this is a better compromi

Obviously you don't shoot landscape or architecture. Parts of the shot that you want can easily be this dark, think about a dim landscape at sunset under a bright sky. Or the sunny top of a skyscraper and the shadowed and dim street.

Well I dont shoot landscapes but I do a lot of location portraits in the summer, and the landscape is just as important to me as the model.
So I was pleased to see your last comment. 100% agree. Eg a shot of a model on an outcrop of a rock on the edge of a ravine. The sky was very bright, the model needed fill flash as the sun was behind her. I exposed for the bright landscape but wanted to pull the detail in the very shaded, very long ravine gully ( sorry example pic is not on my ipad ). In that situation DR would have helped me no end.
Maybe a 6D could do it???? But my 5D3 cant, well I cant do it. ( only way would be to take 2 shots and blend it in post. Whereas I suspect the nikon d810 would do a better job.

Submariner wrote in post #17428342
So I was pleased to see your last comment. 100% agree. Eg a shot of a model on an outcrop of a rock on the edge of a ravine. The sky was very bright, the model needed fill flash as the sun was behind her. I exposed for the bright landscape but wanted to pull the detail in the very shaded, very long ravine gully ( sorry example pic is not on my ipad ). In that situation DR would have helped me no end.

See for a landscape shooter, this situation can be the the majority of photos! Hence why this issue is actually important beyond gear wank.

Here's an example of the worst case scenario (i.e., rare in practise but demonstrates the technical difference) from photographylife.com, this is with the shadow slider set to max in Lightroom.

Shadowblade wrote in post #17427731
That's why I had little difficulty in this shot with the 5D2, despite the huge dynamic range of the scene - it worked better for the trees to be silhouetted:

Nice shot, and yes, a great example of an artistic decision that produced a great looking image, and was within the capabilities of the equipment.

Mornnb wrote in post #17428311
High ISO noise is really about pixel size, smaller pixels gather less light.
Now obviously if you reduce the size of pixels in a full frame camera to the same size as pixels in a crop camera you are going to have similar noise performance to a crop camera. The 5Ds is sacrificing high ISO performance for resolution. But for many people this is a better compromise.

Yea, I was definitely talking about low ISO noise. At higher ISOs other noise issues come into play (and in fact, mask the issues Canon have at low ISO; hence they're competitive for high ISO shooting).

Note that what matters is noise per unit area, not necessarily noise per pixel. As long as you have sufficient resolution in your image for your printing size and viewing distance (i.e. it doesn't look like Lego, regardless of the noise) the noise issue is about area/magnification.

o dear.

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=n8L2bljfLiU

Slow buffer.

And that new 11-24mm lens is not all cracked up to me as there is still distortion

jonneymendoza wrote in post #17428396
o dear.

https://www.youtube.co​m/watch?v=n8L2bljfLiU

Slow buffer.

And that new 11-24mm lens is not all cracked up to me as there is still distortion

It looked like perspective distortion to me; no amount of optical magic is going to be able to do anything about that.