Do you expect an EOS 5D Mark V anytime EVER?

Has there been a Mark V on any Canon DSLR? seems like the Mark IV will the last and moving to EOS R territory (EOS Rs?).

And besides 5D Mark V, 5D5, 5D v5, etc just does not sound right...

sploo wrote in post #18989656
.
Would be good though wouldn't it? 50-60MP and 10fps would be awesome for wildlife.
.

.
50-60 MP and 20 FPS would be even better.

I have 10 FPS now with my 1D4, and there are many times when it isn't enough. . I get bursts of running deer or flying birds, and see two consecutive frames where the wing or leg positions are a bit awkward, and wish so badly that I had a frame right in between those two. . Even 20 FPS would leave me wanting more in some situations.

A friend of mine has a 1DX 2 and a 5DSR, and he is always torn between which body to pick up and shoot wildlife with. . He is satisfied with the resolution of the 5DSR, but often misses key frames whenever the critters are moving fast. . And he connects on a lot of frames with his 1DX2, but laments the lack of feather and hair detail, and the fact that he cannot print at huge sizes at the DPI that he wants for ultimate detail rendering.

I can't believe it's 2020 and we are still forced to compromise and choose either one thing or another. . Ten years ago, I would have bet the farm that by 2020 the "ultimate camera", a camera with no compromises, would have been available to everyone at affordable prices.

Now my mindset has changed. . I think I'll probably live for 30 more years, and I don't think that we'll have a perfect camera even by that time. . So I expect to live my whole life and then die without ever getting to use a still camera that does everything exactly the way I want it to. . Cameras are frustrating to me, because I think of all the things I want them to do that they can't do.

.

I have to believe that there is a software solution to that. Given two frames 1/10th second apart, it should be fairly trivial to generate any number of in-between frames. Off to search the web.

With canon switching over to a RF lens and the way the market is today.I will cast my vote on a "Mirror-less 5D MarkV type R body with a lot of bells and whistles.

sssc wrote in post #18989701
With canon switching over to a RF lens and the way the market is today.I will cast my vote on a "Mirror-less 5D MarkV type R body with a lot of bells and whistles.

I would cast my vote on a R model as well. One concern is the cost of RF lenses. The 70-200 RF is about $900 more than the current EF version. A 300 f2.8 RF or 500 f4 RF could be very expensive.

Tom, right now, Sony can give you 20 fps at 24MP (A9) or 10 fps at 61MP (A7 RIV)
So 25% more frame rate than 1DXIII, with a bit more MP, or double 5DS frame rate with a bit more MP.
(The A9 was released May 2017, the A7RIV very recently. )

You may not get your perfect camera, but you will get a significantly less compromises.

Choderboy wrote in post #18989810
.
Tom, right now, Sony can give you 20 fps at 24MP (A9) or 10 fps at 61MP (A7 RIV)
.

.
Every time I hear about cameras with great specs like that, when I look into them deeper they seem to work only under certain very limiting parameters. . Like it will only give you that speed and resolution if you're shooting jpegs, or it will not be that fast if you are in AI Servo and focus tracking your subject, or only of you're using Live View, but not if you're using the EVF, or only with compressed RAW and not uncompressed, or ......

I'd be interested in knowing if this A9 you speak of has one of these limiting parameters that go along with the high frame rate, or if it is indeed a "real" spec. . If it is a true 20 FPS at 24 MP, with no limitations on when or how that works, then they are heading in the right direction, and 20 FPS at 40 or 50 MP wouldn't seem to be too many years away.

.

The A9 limitations are fairly minimal IMO. As far as I can remember, continuous shooting drops bit depth from 14 to 12, and 20fps is only in compressed RAW - still the full 24MP. Uncompressed RAW is limited to 12fps I think - I’ve never used uncompressed. Otherwise it’s as advertised with full continuous “real time” AF tracking performance with EyeAF, etc. using the EVF or LCD with zero shutter blackout. There are configurable “blinkies” to actually show you that you’re taking photos since the A9’s are primarily made as e-shutter cameras and they shoot completely silently with almost no rolling shutter (you can turn on a simulated shutter sound if you like). The A9 has a 5fps mechanical shutter and the A9 II has 10fps if you need to shoot mechanical. I can’t think of any other limitations, other than it has to be with a compatible lens, which includes pretty much anything you’d want to shoot at 20fps. Adapted lenses will shoot at 10fps with AF tracking - with newer lenses seeming to perform better than older ones.

The Sonys also have an APS-C crop mode, with a corresponding reduction in MP of course, so the R series is more usable in that regard since the A9 in crop mode ends up around 10MP.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18989828
.
Every time I hear about cameras with great specs like that, when I look into them deeper they seem to work only under certain very limiting parameters. . Like it will only give you that speed and resolution if you're shooting jpegs, or it will not be that fast if you are in AI Servo and focus tracking your subject, or only of you're using Live View, but not if you're using the EVF, or only with compressed RAW and not uncompressed, or ......

I'd be interested in knowing if this A9 you speak of has one of these limiting parameters that go along with the high frame rate, or if it is indeed a "real" spec. . If it is a true 20 FPS at 24 MP, with no limitations on when or how that works, then they are heading in the right direction, and 20 FPS at 40 or 50 MP wouldn't seem to be too many years away.

.

For full 20fps, with most Sony lenses, compressed RAW needs to be used. Compressed RAW was the only option for Sony cameras for a long time and they finally introduced uncompressed RAW. A 24MP image in compressed RAW is about 24MB instead of 47MB of an uncompressed RAW. Compressed RAW is 12 bits while uncompressed is 14 bits. Under some circumstances, artifacts can result from compressed RAW. It's rare and many users never experience them. It's more common to experience artifacts in landscape photography. With uncompressed RAW the A9 does 12 fps.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18989666
.
50-60 MP and 20 FPS would be even better.

I have 10 FPS now with my 1D4, and there are many times when it isn't enough. . I get bursts of running deer or flying birds, and see two consecutive frames where the wing or leg positions are a bit awkward, and wish so badly that I had a frame right in between those two. . Even 20 FPS would leave me wanting more in some situations.

A friend of mine has a 1DX 2 and a 5DSR, and he is always torn between which body to pick up and shoot wildlife with. . He is satisfied with the resolution of the 5DSR, but often misses key frames whenever the critters are moving fast. . And he connects on a lot of frames with his 1DX2, but laments the lack of feather and hair detail, and the fact that he cannot print at huge sizes at the DPI that he wants for ultimate detail rendering.

I can't believe it's 2020 and we are still forced to compromise and choose either one thing or another. . Ten years ago, I would have bet the farm that by 2020 the "ultimate camera", a camera with no compromises, would have been available to everyone at affordable prices.

Now my mindset has changed. . I think I'll probably live for 30 more years, and I don't think that we'll have a perfect camera even by that time. . So I expect to live my whole life and then die without ever getting to use a still camera that does everything exactly the way I want it to. . Cameras are frustrating to me, because I think of all the things I want them to do that they can't do.

.

Summarized what I feel very well, thank you Your friend enjoyed the combination of my dreams while I was completing my lens set and waiting for the better cameras to come out.

I guess I'll pull the trigger with 1Dx mark III not to die waiting for the perfect camera to come out. And check 5D mark V or IV as the second camera for everything else(I was thinking of 5DSr mark II before but obviously there won't be such thing )

gjl711 wrote in post #18989683
I have to believe that there is a software solution to that. Given two frames 1/10th second apart, it should be fairly trivial to generate any number of in-between frames. Off to search the web.

"Tweening": https://en.wikipedia.o​rg/wiki/Inbetweening

There are/have been tools around to generate extra frames in video (e.g. faking 120fps from 30fps); though I can't recall the name of any tools right now.

I suspect it wouldn't be good enough to produce a convincing still frame though.

Never know about Canon.Starting to think why wouldn't they release both cameras this year with a 5D Mark V and a Canon R professional bodies. Even with putting the EF line of glass on hold and working on the RF line. Makes me rethink this some.

The photographic problem that is frequently encountered...

1. SOME of the highlight areas are ones in which preservation of detail is desirable, and also
   
2. SOME OTHERS of the highlight ares are ones which DO NOT MATTER from a photographic perspective
   

• simply letting 'foolproof metering' be used ...results in the bride being underexposed (and the white dress going grayish) in order to keep all the pixels ETTR
  
• setting the threshhold by 'number of pixels' is not the best way of doing this, unless you experimentally progressively determine the right count to set...by then the shot is missed
  
• It would be better to use a touch screen (rather than 'blown-out pixel' counts) to indicate exclusion zones to exclude from the 'keep it on the histogram' goal...but the countless chrome orbs makes that an issue with 'foolproof auto'
  

Wilt wrote in post #18992568
Maybe 'foolproof auto' used with EC?!

Or exposure bracketing.

Pippan wrote in post #18992609
Or exposure bracketing.

Quite a few cell phones now have that with HDR mode that does that automatically....but of course overall quality won't be as good as if you are experienced and using a dedicated camera with settings you know.

As for the 5D4, keep in mind that it's DR is improved and isn't as dependent with ETTR. I think most users are experienced enough to know to judge such in the histogram. It doesn't have the noise or banding as previous models when raising shadows. Also, it seems folks either don't know or are overlooking the fact that the 5D4 has a feature for judging brightness after the fact the RAW was shot (RAW image processing).