I recently hired a Canon 5Ds for an assignment that needed a lot of resolution.
Since I'm mostly an architecture photographer I thought it would be cool to test it in the field that is my expertise and where this camera should excel.
To make it a fair (but not scientific) comparison I returned to a spot I've been a lot and tried to recreate one of my favorites.
A bit of technical background, I do most of my prints at 90cm by 60 cm, so that is about my reference and where I thought the extra resolution would come in handy.
It's not that I'm disappointed, but I'd think the difference would be way more apparent, both files are about 8200 pixels wide and both files are in my opinion edited and ready to be printed.
Could you please tell me what you see? Was I expecting too much from the 5Ds, is my technique lacking or was my editing not on par?
Shot 1 is taken with the rented 5Ds and a 17mm TS-E
Shot 2 is taken with my old and trusty 5D and a Sigma 35mm 1.4