# Review: Canon EOS 5DS & EOS 5DS R



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 6, 2015)

```
Bryan at The-Digital-Picture has completed <a href="http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5Ds.aspx" target="_blank">his review of the EOS 5DS and EOS 5DS R camera bodies</a>. Like us, he loves the additional resolving power for most types of photography. While they’re not the ideal cameras for action photography, they’re not pushovers either.</p>
<p>From Bryan:</p>
<blockquote><p>CPN (Canon Professional Network) calls it “A Revolution in Resolution”. The Canon EOS 5Ds and 5Ds R show us a level of detail that we’ve never seen before in a DSLR camera. The announcement of the 5Ds and 5Ds R brought high expectations and the arrival of these cameras offered few surprises. The Canon 5Ds promised to perform amazingly and it has delivered on that promise.</p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Canon EOS 5DS: <a href="http://www.adorama.com/ICA5DS.html?kbid=64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1119026-REG/canon_0581c002_eos_5ds_dslr_camera.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00T3ERPT8/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00T3ERPT8&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=C3LAZKJCU4IRBJUF" target="_blank">Amazon</a> Canon EOS 5DS R: <a href="http://www.adorama.com/ICA5DS.html?kbid=64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1119026-REG/canon_0581c002_eos_5ds_dslr_camera.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00T3ERPT8/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00T3ERPT8&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20&linkId=C3LAZKJCU4IRBJUF" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></p>
```


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 6, 2015)

On high ISO performance:

_"In summary, the 5Ds and 5Ds R (equally) deliver very clean, smooth results at low ISO settings despite their incredible resolution. While these cameras are more similar to the latest APS-C models in their pixel-level high ISO noise, downsizing the ultra-high resolution images to match any other class-leading full frame, low noise-level camera shows the 5Ds to be at least an equal in performance. While the 5Ds may not take low light performance to a whole new level, low light performance is not sacrificed and this camera competes strongly with the best available in this regard."_

As expected, you can read the ISO performance of the sensor two very different ways:


At a pixel-level, this is not far off from a 7D2.
If you drop the 5DS shot down to 5D3 resolution, all those pixels are being put to work to lessen the noise you see.

So if you want to cry foul and hate this, you can. (Heck, you probably did the second Maeda-san said there would be 7D2-level noise performance at the pixel level.)

But if you want to see the glass as half-full, you could argue that this is simultaneously a monster in the studio / on a tripod _and_ is like a 5D3 in low-light... if you don't mind sacrificing the pixels. That's an interesting way to look at a perceived weakness of these new rigs. I expected them to categorically be worse than my 5D3 at high ISO noise, but if downsizing can mask that, perhaps this rig will have more adopters.

Why am I not shocked that people will adore or despise this camera in equal measure?

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 6, 2015)

Also:
_
"*The 5Ds has the same dynamic range as 5D III*. While some will complain that the closest Nikon-equivalent body has more dynamic range (and more is better), I haven't had an issue with the 5D III's DR. When I can't retain both shadows and highlights in an image, that scene generally needs very significantly more DR and exposure bracketing with HDR handles those instances nicely."_

I've bolded that bit above (BC did not in his review) as I'm sure folks were curious.

He's generally right about saying 'when you need more DR, you need a _crapload_ more DR' and I'm perfectly happy with my 5D3, but I think the Internet Cult of Sensor Worshippers will cry foul on dismissing the differences between Canon and Nikon. After all, DXO has yet to poop on the 5DS in their cuddly, readily-forwardable infographic form. 

That said, if you leave your mount and choose another for one more stop of DR, best of luck to you. I could never leave all this great glass.

- A


----------



## NancyP (Jul 6, 2015)

It's all the great glass that is inhibiting my upgrade ;D I have a 6D and enjoy it a lot. But I covet wonderful lenses, and I can imagine a great use of 5Ds/r money: TS-E 24 plus Sigma 50 Art


----------



## Eldar (Jul 6, 2015)

Very thorough review from Bryan, as always.

Initially, when these cameras were announced, I was very disappointed that we did not get more DR. But what I have come to realise is that my main issue was not DR, but shadow noise. And this is an area where these cameras are doing very well. So my DR issues are gone. Only remaining irritation is the lack of support for a high precision focusing screen for manual focus.

And for the record, I have not had one single moiré issue yet.


----------



## docsmith (Jul 6, 2015)

Eldar said:


> But what I have come to realise is that my main issue was not DR, but shadow noise.



^^^^ This.

Every once it awhile it is shadow noise from a regular image. But usually it is wanting cleaner night/star scapes, so less dark noise at ~ISO 3200.

Looking at Bryan's review, the 5Ds is better:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=980&Test=1&ISO=3200&CameraComp=792&TestComp=0&ISOComp=3200

But something less than a full stop:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Camera-Noise.aspx?Camera=980&Test=1&ISO=3200&CameraComp=792&TestComp=0&ISOComp=1600

As I am very happy with my 5DIII, I am going to hold out and see what the 5DIV offers. But with Bryan, you have to sometimes really think about what he writes. And the last line of the review has me wondering:

_I'll leave you with a warning: this camera may make you feel like going back to reshoot some of your favorite images._


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 6, 2015)

docsmith said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > But what I have come to realise is that my main issue was not DR, but shadow noise.
> ...



I adore the resource Bryan Carnathan is to the Canon faithful -- I have visited his site hundreds (if not thousands) of times to look up a spec, check IQ, read his reviews, etc. TDP is so fricken handy. Further, I appreciate the little things he finds that you only see through the heavy use of a product. His usage and handling insights are stellar.

However, I have not seen him utter a _single_ critical word of a bigger-ticket Canon item (L lens, 7D2, any FF body, etc.) in ages. He tends to be a very brand-loyal cheerleader for the company, and as such, would never say anything like "I'm disappointed it's 2015 and I still can't get one more stop of low light than with my 2012 camera", "why spot metering at off-center AF points is reserved for the 1D line makes no sense", etc.

I appreciate such statements might be more fodder for forums and wouldn't be something _he_ particularly would say, but I'd like to believe that if he can offer enthusiastic support of a product, he could also be a bit harsher with his criticism at times. He _always_ likes Canon -- and generally without reservation. But if a professor curves all his grades to an A / A-, it's hard to pick the winners from the losers, right?

I am not knocking the man one bit -- again, I _cherish_ his work as a reviewer -- but it would be nice to see him more frankly point out Canon's deficiencies.

- A


----------



## docsmith (Jul 6, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> I am not knocking the man one bit -- again, I _cherish_ his work as a reviewer -- but it would be nice to see him more frankly point out Canon's deficiencies.
> 
> - A



I suspect digital cameras to Bryan are a bit like flying to Louis CK (who swears...a lot...whereas I've yet to read a curse in Bryan's reviews...so there is that difference)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3dYS7PcAG4

Just too amazing that this little wafer can capture an image so amazingly well to really complain about.....

But, you read his reviews, you can gleen a lot of information.


----------



## Bernard (Jul 6, 2015)

Eldar said:


> Only remaining irritation is the lack of support for a high precision focusing screen for manual focus.



That's the showstopper for me. I tried the camera over the weekend, and it is sharp, only I can't tell where the sharpness is until I review the images.

The built-in screen is softer than arctic cotton, useless for anything more than basic framing. AF is a non-starter, it may get something sharp, but not consistently where I want unless I adjust my composition to match-up with AF points.

That leaves live view. I may as well be using a view camera.

I understand why the 5D Mark III doesn't have interchangeable screens. It's cheaper to build that way, and it's predominantly a sports/AF camera. The DS and DSr, on the other hand, are made for precision work, and you can't do that when your screen looks like it's been smeared in jelly.


----------



## bgoyette (Jul 6, 2015)

As a longtime Hasselblad digital owner, I can tell you that my interest in this camera has been strong since long before it was announced. After receiving my 5dsr several weeks ago, I immediately ran a few very specific tests mostly designed to determine comparative resolution and skin tone "quality" between my H5d-40 and the 5dsr. I expected that the detail levels would be similar, but in fact the Canon largely exceeded the Hasselblad (in theory it should, but you never know). The happy surprise came when the Canon was easily able to match the Hasselblad's skin tone "profile". (Something I've found challenging with other Canon Cameras in the past). The hasselblad does seem to handle overexposure better, but Canon counters with nicer looking shadows and recovers underexposure far better. This new camera excels in many ways over Hasselblad's entry level (and 3 times more expensive) camera, and I think it will probably fair pretty well in comparison to the 50mp H cameras as well.

My first tests of the autofocus left me a little confused. The hasselblad, while limited and slower, is incredibly accurate, and it's a system I'm used to. The canon is obviously faster and more robust of a system, but I had a lot of issues on my first shoot. For right now I'm putting that down to inexperience using Canon's autofocus (I spent a few hours with the manual after that test shoot and look forward to trying it again.)

As someone who has a large investment in Hasselblad gear....I find that there are very few (and mostly minor) areas where the Hasselblad excels over the Canon: the lenses in the Hasselblad stable are generally stronger, but Canon seems hell bent on changing that equation, and at certain focal lengths I doubt there's much of a difference (certainly the 85mm L is every bit as good as the 100mm F2.2 HC). At this point I'm not sure which viewfinder is the winner, but generally we think of the hasselblads being larger and brighter. Lets see... the hasselblad does sit on a tripod in a more balanced way due to it's forward/aft design...but beyond that there aren't a lot of other areas image, performance and ergonomic where the Canon doesn't win by an expectable margin.


----------



## PureClassA (Jul 6, 2015)

After 2-3 weeks of having it, i finally got to do a real studio set with my 5DSR just yesterday. It's really incredible how much detail it can suck up, which gives me so much more latitude in post to crop and change things.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 6, 2015)

Bernard said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > Only remaining irritation is the lack of support for a high precision focusing screen for manual focus.
> ...



I've found that setting the zoom (magnifying glass) icon to a default 1:1 zoom gives me a solid and quick read of sharpness on my 5D3. I don't chimp it like that all the time, but when I am working with a large aperture lens, I like to make sure I nailed the eye and not the eyebrow or nose.

I admit it's not specifically what you are looking for, but it's a way to cope if you are concerned on that front.

- A


----------



## quadrantG (Jul 7, 2015)

I received the 5DS R from Adorama and it appears to be defective out of the box. I have 3 "L" lenses, 16-35, 24-70, 70-200 and I am unable to adjust the aperture on any of them with this camera. I have tried in all modes including manual and AV. It remains wide open, 2.8. with all lenses. These lenses work fine with my 5D mkIII. I have contacted both Canon and Adorama and I am waited for a response. The bummer is that this camera is still on back order, so who knows how long it will take if it must be replaced.


----------



## drjlo (Jul 7, 2015)

Looks like my next Canon body will be a 5D IV


----------



## AlanF (Jul 7, 2015)

NancyP said:


> It's all the great glass that is inhibiting my upgrade ;D I have a 6D and enjoy it a lot. But I covet wonderful lenses, and I can imagine a great use of 5Ds/r money: TS-E 24 plus Sigma 50 Art



And the 400mm f/5.6 is not on the list of recommended lenses!


----------



## PureClassA (Jul 7, 2015)

Probably because it's not long before getting upgraded. They'll keep it at 5.6, but give it all the newer treatments and maybe IS but doubtful. Canon would rather sell you (right now) the 100-400 L variable. I can't imagine even at 400mm it having a lesser performance than the old 5.6 prime.



AlanF said:


> NancyP said:
> 
> 
> > It's all the great glass that is inhibiting my upgrade ;D I have a 6D and enjoy it a lot. But I covet wonderful lenses, and I can imagine a great use of 5Ds/r money: TS-E 24 plus Sigma 50 Art
> ...


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 7, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Probably because it's not long before getting upgraded. They'll keep it at 5.6, but give it all the newer treatments and maybe IS but doubtful. Canon would rather sell you (right now) the 100-400 L variable. I can't imagine even at 400mm it having a lesser performance than the old 5.6 prime.
> 
> 
> AlanF said:
> ...


I wouldn't read that list of recommended lenses too strictly as a tell for future developments. I think it was more of Canon conceding that many of their older lenses are not rock-stars resolution-wise. 

Roger Cicala's comparison brackets this pretty well. He compared 5D3 vs. 5DS vs. 5DSr performance with great wide / standard / long lenses and one ordinary one. Every lens benefited from the added pixels of the 5DS rigs, but the ordinary lens (a beat-up used 50 f/1.4) didn't benefit as much -- especially in the corners:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/06/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-initial-resolution-tests

Consider: I love my 50 f/1.4 USM when the focus nails it -- it is absolutely sharper than the 50L at the apertures I shoot -- but _if I was migrating to a 50 MP rig_, I'd be looking for a lens developed more recently than 1993. 

- A


----------



## AlanF (Jul 7, 2015)

I was joking with Nancy over the 400mm f/5.6 as she loves it so much. It is a very sharp lens and it is crazy that it is not on the list of recommended lenses.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 7, 2015)

AlanF said:


> I was joking with Nancy over the 400mm f/5.6 as she loves it so much. It is a very sharp lens and it is crazy that it is not on the list of recommended lenses.



I don't trust that recommended list at all. Some of it screams "Why buy that old junk when you can buy this [much pricier] new sexy thing?". It oozes 'marketing push', and I cringe the day when a sticker gets put on lens boxes that says "High resolution approved!".

- A


----------



## Kuja (Jul 7, 2015)

Bernard said:


> Eldar said:
> 
> 
> > Only remaining irritation is the lack of support for a high precision focusing screen for manual focus.
> ...



I have both split image and micro prism screens for my 1Ds MkIII 
...and I can't trust them 100% if I want perfectly focused eye lashes with a large aperture lens.

In my case, live view is the only way to go.


----------



## ScottyP (Jul 8, 2015)

Would the extra detail allow you to do more noise reduction on a high ISO shot though?

The review talks about downsizing the image to 30MP and making it look like the 5d3. But what about applying noise reduction? Usually that is only good up to a point because it removes too much detail in an already detail-starved high ISO image. What if you cranked on the noise reduction here; could you get a better result from this camera than from a lower res sensor?


----------



## Diltiazem (Jul 8, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Also:
> _
> "*The 5Ds has the same dynamic range as 5D III*. While some will complain that the closest Nikon-equivalent body has more dynamic range (and more is better), I haven't had an issue with the 5D III's DR. When I can't retain both shadows and highlights in an image, that scene generally needs very significantly more DR and exposure bracketing with HDR handles those instances nicely."_
> 
> ...



It seems that 5DSR has nearly one stop better DR than 5DIII at base ISO

 http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 8, 2015)

ScottyP said:


> Would the extra detail allow you to do more noise reduction on a high ISO shot though?
> 
> The review talks about downsizing the image to 30MP and making it look like the 5d3. But what about applying noise reduction? Usually that is only good up to a point because it removes too much detail in an already detail-starved high ISO image. What if you cranked on the noise reduction here; could you get a better result from this camera than from a lower res sensor?



That's precisely what Bryan Carnathan was arguing: Mo Pixels, Mo Solutions.

Like I said before, you _could_ view the 5DS as a low-ISO Studio/Landscape 50 MP rig and a high ISO 20-25 MP rig (like the 5D3 is now). So it's all good unless you need to shoot a yeti at ISO 25,600 and net 50 useable megapixels.

So I'm guessing the following read will take place based on his and others reviews -- in really broad strokes:

Studio / Landscape / Large Print folks: They've already pre-ordered one of the 5DS rigs. This is what they need.

General pros, enthusiasts, folks looking for a great overall camera with money in their pocket: _May_ be swayed towards picking up a 5DS based on this downsizing noise reduction play. (I am in this group but my money is still on the 5D4.)

Sports / Wildlife / Birders: Want more FPS and want better high ISO performance. I assume they'd wait for a 5D4 or 1DX / 1DX II

Videographers: They'll pass on this and hope Canon gives the 5D4 the 4K option.

...but I could be wrong.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 8, 2015)

Diltiazem said:


> It seems that 5DSR has nearly one stop better DR than 5DIII at base ISO
> 
> http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm



DXO hasn't published 5DSr data yet. Where did they get this data?

That's great news if true. Landscapers would certainly smile about that.

- A


----------



## Diltiazem (Jul 8, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Diltiazem said:
> 
> 
> > It seems that 5DSR has nearly one stop better DR than 5DIII at base ISO
> ...



This is from Bill Claff. His measurements have been quite reliable over the years and mirror DXO results, although his actual values are lower than DXO. For example at ISO100 D810 scores 11.02, much lower than DXO's 14 or so.


----------



## ritholtz (Jul 8, 2015)

Diltiazem said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Diltiazem said:
> ...


Bill Class is very well respected in DPreview. His measurements are suppose to be more practical than dxo. Lot of people started questioning usefulness of dxo DR numbers when they somehow got more DR from d7200 than d750.


----------

