Canon 6D vs 5Ds Samples and thoughts

Ive had the 6D for a few months now but have been very interested in the 5Ds as I shoot fashion/glamour work. Rented the 5Ds and just fired off some test shots, wanted to get some feedback. Does anyone really see any differences here? I really don't and wouldn't know which camera took which photo if asked. Had to resize due to the 10MB limit here but even at full size (25MB for 5Ds 11MB 6D) there is no noticeable difference. Id post full size samples if I could find somewhere online that will host a 25MB file. Thoughts?

Your lighting is pretty good here for the subject and at this size and screen resolution I think it will be fairly difficult to tell. I certainly can't tell any difference at these dimensions.

The advantage of the 5Ds is the ability to print large or do some insane cropping. It's very unlikely you can appreciate any difference in web images.

You also have to wonder if the 5Ds is getting its best using the 50 1.8.

gonzogolf wrote in post #17748597
The advantage of the 5Ds is the ability to print large or do some insane cropping. It's very unlikely you can appreciate any difference in web images.

You also have to wonder if the 5Ds is getting its best using the 50 1.8.

True on the large prints and cropping. The 50 f/1.8 is actually on the list of recommended lenses Canon put out for the 5Ds. Also shot some natural light shots outside with the 85 f/1.8 (another recommended lens) but again, no really noticeable differences.

I see no difference but if I was forced to guess, I would say the 2nd one is 5Ds.
Might be wrong though.

Van Gogh wrote in post #17748916
I see no difference but if I was forced to guess, I would say the 2nd one is 5Ds.
Might be wrong though.

2nd is the 6D, says right above the images actually

What sort of "difference" are you looking for? As above, if you downsize the 5Ds image to the same dimensions as the 6D image and shoot both at base iso with good light you wouldn't expect a difference.

Shoot the milky way with the 5Ds and see how it looks compared to the 6D.

The two main differences with the images from the two cameras is that the 6D should have slightly better noise characteristics (when viewed at 100%, downsizing will make the differences less apparent) The 5Ds will give larger files. That is about the biggest differences between the two (besides the superior AF of the 5Ds). There isn't anything really magic about it.

Copidosoma wrote in post #17749307
What sort of "difference" are you looking for? As above, if you downsize the 5Ds image to the same dimensions as the 6D image and shoot both at base iso with good light you wouldn't expect a difference.

Shoot the milky way with the 5Ds and see how it looks compared to the 6D.

The two main differences with the images from the two cameras is that the 6D should have slightly better noise characteristics (when viewed at 100%, downsizing will make the differences less apparent) The 5Ds will give larger files. That is about the biggest differences between the two (besides the superior AF of the 5Ds). There isn't anything really magic about it.

I expected to see a lot more detail with 30 more megapixels, thats for sure. Took about 50 shots with the two cameras of the same subjects. Not just the guitar but flowers in natural light. Looking at the images side by side at 100%, I really see no difference in detail which I find surprising given one has 20 megapixels and one has 50, thats a massive difference.

There aren't a lot of micro detail in your subject to being out. Plus keepn mind that when you view the files at 100,% the 5Ds is magnified more so if they appear the same its okay as the 100% would be a larger print size.

Crop a small square of only the top two strings over the pick up and post those.

Left Handed Brisket wrote in post #17749478
Crop a small square of only the top two strings over the pick up and post those.

1:1 crop

Just looking at the pickups and the second string (although I think the string is just lighting) I see quite a bit more detail.

Twice as much? hard to measure.

Remember that megapickles are two dimensional while the actual width of a pixel isn't. Presumably, smaller pixels (smaller width) can resolve finer details (lens effects aside) but doubling resolution only increases that resolution (i.e. decreases the size of the pixels) by maybe 50%. Really rough numbers but you get the idea.

The really big question is whether that extra detail you are capturing is "worth it". Nobody can answer that in a general way as it is different for everyone.

BTW, I'm impressed with how well that lens is handling that resolution.

A little off topic, but how is the post-processing? I'd image the 5Ds files are so huge and takes significantly more time to process?

From a numbers point of view, doubling the number of pixels only gives a 25% increase in linear resolution. To double the linear resolution you need to multiply the number of pixels by four. So to double the linear resolution of an image with say 22 Mpixels, you actually need a camera with 88 Mpix. Looking at those 100% crops it is clear that there is a significant increase in resolution. The windings around the second string are perfectly clear in the 5DS shot, while the 6D shows no detail on that string at all.

Alan

dexter75 wrote in post #17748591
Ive had the 6D for a few months now but have been very interested in the 5Ds as I shoot fashion/glamour work.

Just out of curiosity, why? What exactly is the use case in fashion and glamour for a 50MP image?

I've seen some really impressive 1:1 crops shot with MF cameras like the PhaseOne, thought "ooh that is amazing", and then realized that unless I were printing subway posters or billboards for Times Sq., or doing insane crops (which I've never done except for bird photos), I'd have no use for this level of detail. As it is, almost everything I show on the web is downsampled, even if cropped, and the only time I make good use of a full-resolution file is if I'm making a 13" x 19" print.