# 5DS/5DSr - TDP Noise Test posted just now



## ahsanford (Jun 24, 2015)

Carnathan speaks:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=15315

- A


----------



## tayassu (Jun 24, 2015)

I was expecting the similarity to the 7DII, but I'm very pleased to hear about the performance after downsizing.
Downsizing at 5DIII level would just mean exporting the image in Lightroom with 22 MP or am I mistaken there?


----------



## meywd (Jun 24, 2015)

The next generation gonna be awesome


----------



## mistaspeedy (Jun 24, 2015)

So... long story short... the Canon 5Ds and 5DsR sensors are Canon's best sensors at everything!
Best low ISO, best high ISO, best dynamic range, best ability to recover shadows, best resolution etc.

To compare to another Canon camera, just resize to the same resolution!

This should hardly be surprising, since Canon always use their best sensor tech in any given camera, which they mentioned in an interview (the 6D being a good example of this).


----------



## Act444 (Jun 24, 2015)

Better than I might have expected, and I've been able to do some of my own testing as well - but you still take a hit. That said, it is still better(!) than my Rebel SL1 as far as pixel level noise goes. I feel the 7D2 is still a hair better but it's really close. The 5DS embarrasses the 7D in terms of detail capture though...


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 24, 2015)

About what I expected, high per pixel noise at high ISO's. That is what Canon promised. Sure, like any camera, you can downsize the image so that noise does not look so bad, but then, why did you spend $$$$ on a 50MP camera, just to lose resolution by downsizing the image and getting almost the same noise as a much cheaper 5D MK III?

If I were to buy one, it would be because I needed high resolution, and I'd stick to ISO 400 or below. I bought a D800 and found the same thing.


----------



## meywd (Jun 24, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> About what I expected, high per pixel noise at high ISO's. That is what Canon promised. Sure, like any camera, you can downsize the image so that noise does not look so bad, but then, why did you spend $$$$ on a 50MP camera, just to lose resolution by downsizing the image and getting almost the same noise as a much cheaper 5D MK III?
> 
> If I were to buy one, it would be because I needed high resolution, and I'd stick to ISO 400 or below. I bought a D800 and found the same thing.



I am sure you know that this can't change unless the sensor tech improves....significantly.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jun 24, 2015)

meywd said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > About what I expected, high per pixel noise at high ISO's. That is what Canon promised. Sure, like any camera, you can downsize the image so that noise does not look so bad, but then, why did you spend $$$$ on a 50MP camera, just to lose resolution by downsizing the image and getting almost the same noise as a much cheaper 5D MK III?
> ...



I have yet to see per pixel noise being low at high ISO's, but the Sony sensors do generate less noise by having D/A on the sensor. Its a small improvement, but we are only going to see small improvements. Sensors are very close to theoretical limits, so a different technology is needed to make a quantum leap. I can't guess what that might be, I expect tiny advances. A 1/2 stop improvement with todays level of technology is a big step, we won't see many steps like that.

Some of the things that do make small improvements can be D/A on sensor, stacked sensors, back side illumination. All together, we might see a stop of improvement, and that's huge. Many of the things I expect to see are video related improvements, autofocus improvements, better and smarter exposure systems, and communication enhancements, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, gps, flash communication via radio. Canon will trickle them out over the years unless forced by the competition.


----------



## ahsanford (Jun 24, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> About what I expected, high per pixel noise at high ISO's. That is what Canon promised. Sure, like any camera, you can downsize the image so that noise does not look so bad, but then, why did you spend $$$$ on a 50MP camera, just to lose resolution by downsizing the image and getting almost the same noise as a much cheaper 5D MK III?
> 
> If I were to buy one, it would be because I needed high resolution, and I'd stick to ISO 400 or below. I bought a D800 and found the same thing.



Yep. This is basically what we were promised -- a good light camera meant (largely) for a studio or a tripod.

No surprises here.

- A


----------



## RobertG. (Jun 24, 2015)

Thanks for the link. IMHO with ISO 800 noise is already easily visible. ISO 400 might still be OK, as long as you don't itend to brighten up any part of the picture. For my landscape shots I'm not convinced yet. I'll wait how the Sony A7RII performs. The price of the Sony + Metabones adaptor is similar to a 5DsR in my country. I shoot almost all landscapes with the TS-E lenses, so the Sony will do at least as good as any Canon DSLR camera for this purpose, except for the battery life and the lossy compression. I hope the later will be fixed with a firmware update. I would also take a 5D IV with just 30MP but a much improved sensor. I invested about US$ 20.000 in Canon equipment.... and I really like my Canon lenses.


----------



## 1982chris911 (Jun 24, 2015)

As long as ISO 400-640 is clean that is quite OK for most landscape/detailed work out of the camera. 

With good NR in post ISO 3200 will also mostly work and maybe even 6400... of course some details will be missing but I still expect the detail level to be much higher than on a 5D MK III using the same ISO setting (here ISO 6400 is mostly not usable for anything you wanna print larger than A4) for big prints ISO640-1600 depending on subject is the upper limit of the MK III imo. when using NR in Post.

If you really need speed and high ISO performance the 1DX is still the best but that was expected. being the heavy action/sports/outdoor camera. 

Sometimes I ask myself why many ppl, expect the 5Ds (R) to be something completely different than what Canon obviously intended it to be. It just is a high detail camera for more or less static objects. e.g. People, Landscape, Architecture, Products... For fast moving and/or very low light moving things or high ISO situations e.g. Sports, BIF, distant wildlife the 1DX and 7D MKII will always outperform the 5Ds(R) ... but that is nothing anyone should be surprised about as Canon made the later two exactly for this purpose ... as they made the 5DsR for another purpose.

I am only kind of interested where the 5d MK IV heads (but a kind of Canon copy of the D810 with more fps and increased AF and high ISO would be a nice idea)


----------

