5DSR + 100 macro (not a macro shot) + huge crop

F8, ISO 500, SS 1/1000

SOOC with Default LR jpg sharpening

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/wiqC​qN

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/vn4V​TS

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/wjwW​8n

My God! I didn't even notice the guy on the board in the first two shots. I had to go back and do a double-take.

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #17642224
My God! I didn't even notice the guy on the board in the first two shots. I had to go back and do a double-take.

He paddled by me and then a while later I saw a black bird approaching and crossing in between us so I decided to take a picture just as it was happening to see what would show up in the massive crop - it is pretty incredible what 50 megapixels, IS and a crazy sharp lens can do.

Gives you an idea what big brother has been doing for the last 15 years from space.

What about night shooting? Don't you feel like you're leaving a lot on the table to the MkIII with regards to ISO or is that somehow compensated for by the larger image size?

Yup, sharp lens, f8, 50MP = does not surprise me. When I make an image with my TS-E17 by stitching, which often will give me 30MP+ in the image, it's amazing - I can seemingly just keep zooming in and seeing more and more detail. This is actually true even when stopped down, so although you won't see as much benefit at f11-f16, I think you will still see quite a bit.

Of course if you wanted a shot of just the paddler, a 7DII+crop should look similar.

Yea but look at the sailboats. Damn!

Now I want to see a crop of the ship just for S&G.

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #17642239
What about night shooting? Don't you feel like you're leaving a lot on the table to the MkIII with regards to ISO or is that somehow compensated for by the larger image size?

I think the 5DS/R is quite surprising at high ISO shooting. No, I don't think much of anything is left on the table compared to the 5D III (up to the 5DS' native ISO 6400).

David Arbogast wrote in post #17642308
I think the 5DS/R is quite surprising at high ISO shooting. No, I don't think much of anything is left on the table compared to the 5D III (up to the 5DS' native ISO 6400).

That's what I meant though. The higher ISOs? Do you miss them or does the denser sensor somehow compensate for that too?

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #17642547
That's what I meant though. The higher ISOs? Do you miss them or does the denser sensor somehow compensate for that too?

The denser sensor is why the ISO performance went down, or didn't move at all, instead of improving.

This camera is not good for low light by today's options, the 6D & 5D3 are superior still in that regard.

But this thread is probably the first thread I've seen so far on POTN that shows the real usefulness of the 5DSR series, what it means to have high resolution, to allow for large crops that still are of decent quality (of course, this super crop is more a test of academia). The 5DSR doesn't have any improvements, and really has some lacking areas, in regards to almost all the features on the camera and it's sensor, compared to Canon's other options right now, but it has high resolution which is really good for big crops, or really good for large printing. But that's about it.

Very best,

ejenner wrote in post #17642263
a 7DII+crop should look similar.

I did a post on this topic comparing the 7D2, 5DSR, 24-105 & 100-400II.

While I think they will be similar, I think this exact situation would show the advantage for the 5DSR over the 7D2 / 5DS - i.e. the lack of the AA filter / cancelling AA filter. This is one of the reasons, plus given the Nikon history of removing the AA filter, that I ordered the 5DSR over the 5DS. The 7D2 would be similar to the 5DS but the 5DSR is going to be sharper.

WilsonFlyer wrote in post #17642239
What about night shooting? Don't you feel like you're leaving a lot on the table to the MkIII with regards to ISO or is that somehow compensated for by the larger image size?

I previously started a thread comparing 12,800 ISO of the 5D3 vs the 5DSR

(see link)
https://photography-on-the.net …showthread.php?​p=17605298

with links to the pictures on Flikr for download. In my personal opinion, the 5DSR produced the far superior result. The lack of the AA filter and the far better NR ability of the 5DSR are two of the main reasons. From an end result perspective, the 5DSR produces superior end results up to 12,800 ISO - not something I remotely thought was going to happen - but I stand by this assertion.

Until about 9 months ago when I got my 7D2, I didn't use NR with my 5D3 - I just stopped at the ISO that I was happy with - i.e. I never went above 3200 ISO. I found this 3200 limit after taking extensive pictures in hockey arenas (1/1000, F2.8, ISO 3200 on the 70-200II) - anything above this and I just did not like the pictures. When I got the 7D2, the very first thing I saw was that I did not like ISO 3200 - it was noisier than the 5D3 at 3200 - so I stopped at 2500 ISO. I then remember coming across something that made me start doing a lot of research / education on NR. Once I had a good handle on using NR, I started experimenting with the 7D2 and the 5D3 - and that is when it became obvious that the 7D2 cleaned up far better than I could believe - and that is when I upped my previous 2500 ISO limit to first 3200, then 4000, then 5000 and then 6400 if necessary for the 7D2.

So, with the addition of a cancelling AA filter for the 5DSR and the improvement in sensor technology after a few more years of development by Canon, in my opinion the 5DSR is better than the 5D3 at ever ISO up to 12,800 when the end result is considered - and it isn't even close.

That said, I am shooting a short 2hr backyard wedding today and I will be using 2 cameras - the 5D3 as my main camera with the 24-70II and the 5DSR with be the secondary camera with the 70-200 II IS. The reason for this is 4 fold:
- the 24-70 without IS on the 5DSR needs up to 1/400th at 70mm to basically guarantee tack sharp images
- file handling of all the images during PP
- the specifics about this short wedding I am comfortable that more detail F8 type shots is not what I am going to be going after
- the 5DSR and its buffer size / lack of speed for quickly reviewing pictures does not lend itself to being the main work horse camera during a wedding with constantly changing light conditions / white dresses that can easily blow out etc

wallstreetoneil wrote in post #17642579
I did a post on this topic comparing the 7D2, 5DSR, 24-105 & 100-400II.

While I think they will similar, I think this exact situation would show the advantage for the 5DSR over the 7D2 / 5DS - i.e. the lack of the AA filter / cancelling AA filter. This is one of the reasons, plus given the Nikon history of removing the AA filter, that I ordered the 5DSR over the 5DS. The 7D2 would be similar to the 5DS but the 5DSR is going to be sharper.

Link?

You can search his posts by clicking on his name. And once there, you will find his recent posts on the right side. I think it's there..

Keema wrote in post #17642707
You can search his posts by clicking on his name. And once there, you will find his recent posts on the right side. I think it's there..

Regardless it is not good forum etiquette to reference the existence of another post (in support of claims being made) without supplying the link.

Yup. I agree.