# More Samples Images from Canon EOS 5DS



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jun 11, 2015)

```
PhotographyBLOG has continued adding to their preview gallery of real world shots with the Canon EOS 5DS. This time they’ve decided to pair it with the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L.</p>
<blockquote><p>Last night we took the new 50-megapixel Canon EOS 5Ds with the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM lens to the financial City of London district to test out the 5Ds’s long exposure capabilities.</p></blockquote>
<p><a href="http://www.photographyblog.com/previews/canon_eos_5ds_canon_ef_17_40mm_photos/" target="_blank">You can view the gallery here</a></p>
<p>Shipping for the new high resolution cameras from Canon will begin this Sunday.</p>
<p>Canon EOS 5DS R $3899: <a href="http://adorama.evyy.net/c/60085/51926/1036?u=http://www.adorama.com/results/canonnewfeb" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1119027-REG/canon_0582c002_eos_5ds_r_dslr.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296" target="_blank">B&H</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=X7P2IPISEXTZFLQ7" target="_blank">Amazon</a> | Canon EOS 5DS $3699: <a href="http://adorama.evyy.net/c/60085/51926/1036?u=http://www.adorama.com/results/canonnewfeb" 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</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></p>
```


----------



## lichtmalen (Jun 11, 2015)

And they still suck. Someone give this man a decent lens and a raw processing tutorial.


----------



## niels123 (Jun 11, 2015)

lichtmalen said:


> And they still suck. Someone give this man a decent lens and a raw processing tutorial.



;D
I have to agree with you


----------



## lichtmalen (Jun 11, 2015)

And I would beg the CR guy to not advertise this page any more. Sample pics to and fro but these are really not good and don't show the potential. Only thing that can be done is acquire the raws and process them properly for yourself, cause what he shows there as jpgs is not in a single bit that what the camera can actually deliver if done right.

He is just clickbaiting because he's the first website owner that has a production model.


----------



## Andyx01 (Jun 11, 2015)

Is the point of these posts to show "Why you don't need 50MP" ?

I have yet to see a post on this site that shows off the advantages of a dense sensor.

Also thought I would throw this out there (Max optical resolution) :

Crop FF

f/2.8	96MP	f/4.5
f/4.0	48MP	f/6.4
f/5.6	24MP	f/9.0
f/8.0	12MP	f/12.7
f/11.3	6MP	f/18
f/16	3MP	f/25.4


----------



## bereninga (Jun 11, 2015)

Why would this test be done on the 17-40mm? It should've been done at least on a more recent lens like the 16-35mm f4 or a zoom that's newer. Even a prime as well.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jun 11, 2015)

Have to agree the EF17-40mm f4L was a poor lens choice the EF16-35mm f4L IS USM is a much better lens. Picture shows camera shake also.


----------



## DomTomLondon (Jun 11, 2015)

lichtmalen said:


> And they still suck. Someone give this man a decent lens and a raw processing tutorial.



Wow, so much hate...

Um yeah... not everyone has got or can afford the new ultra wide angle lenses from Canon... Nothing wrong with the 17-40L when stopped down a bit!


----------



## tomscott (Jun 11, 2015)

Regardless of the lens, I downloaded the raws and processed them myself, specifically 16 and 07. 

7 because I wanted to see how the sky details would look after a bit of post processing and 16 because it was underexposed, lifting this 3 stops… handles it very well. Tones are great, and you can push these files really quite far, more than my 5DMKIII anyway.

Regardless of the lens this camera in my eyes looks great, add a sharper lens and the results will be amazing.

Im impressed tbh, great release by Canon.


----------



## lichtmalen (Jun 11, 2015)

DomTomLondon said:


> Wow, so much hate...
> 
> Um yeah... not everyone has got or can afford the new ultra wide angle lenses from Canon...



They are getting _the new flagship camera_ from Canon to test _before everyone else_ and probably are the _first ones_ to show production model sample pictures online. Why would they even do that when they don't have the right lenses for such a job? Or better; why aren't they supplied with a set of decent lenses in the first place? I just don't get it.


----------



## jonjt (Jun 11, 2015)

Andyx01 said:


> Is the point of these posts to show "Why you don't need 50MP" ?
> 
> I have yet to see a post on this site that shows off the advantages of a dense sensor.
> 
> ...




Can you reformat that chart?


----------



## lichtmalen (Jun 11, 2015)

jonjt said:


> Can you reformat that chart?



Resolution in the middle, crop aperture on the left, ff aperture on the right. More I would like to know what this is supposed to say and where it's from. I don't really understand the connection between aperture and high resolution, of course, at smaller apertures at some place diffraction will kick in, but please, I don't think that using f/16 lowers resolution to 3 megapixels on Crop sensors.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 11, 2015)

And explain the calculations. Those calculations look a bit off to me as you narrow the aperture. Thanks.


----------



## zlatko (Jun 11, 2015)

DomTomLondon said:


> lichtmalen said:
> 
> 
> > And they still suck. Someone give this man a decent lens and a raw processing tutorial.
> ...



Such an inappropriate use of the word "hate". That lens is probably the worst of all of the current L lenses. People have been complaining about its corner sharpness ever since it was introduced in 2003. It's certainly not one of the best, and not one that's renowned for image quality. And here it is being used to show the image quality of the highest resolution FF DSLR ever.


----------



## dolina (Jun 11, 2015)

Doesnt matter what the science says. If the customer demands or your require demands 50+MP then the 5DS/5DSR are cheapest way to do it.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 11, 2015)

lichtmalen said:


> jonjt said:
> 
> 
> > Can you reformat that chart?
> ...



Agreed. Calculations look WAY off as you narrow the aperture.


----------



## lichtmalen (Jun 11, 2015)

zlatko said:


> And here it is being used to show the image quality of the highest resolution FF DSLR ever.



They don't have the really good Canon lenses, as he said somewhere in the comments. Apparently they're getting a 70-200 f/2.8L IS II soon, so expect more mediocre jpgs of random stuff.


----------



## TeT (Jun 11, 2015)

lichtmalen said:


> DomTomLondon said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, so much hate...
> ...



having a supposedly subpar lens does not explain those photos... It will be nice when a pros pro takes some shots with the 17 40 just to see what that lens will handle... or what the camera can actually do with that lens...


----------



## Adelino (Jun 11, 2015)

I miss London so I like seeing the mediocre photos  I agree it will be interesting to see what some great pros can do.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jun 11, 2015)

lichtmalen said:


> DomTomLondon said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, so much hate...
> ...



I don't know, but it's been like that with basically every Canon release. Most of the early samples from the week or two before release are some sort of blurred, missed focus, missed exposure, in camera JPGS with NR to max and all waxy and nasty or one thing or another mess. And then people get them in their hands and the first samples from any old Joe on the street show off the camera 100x better in terms of what it can bring.


----------



## R1-7D (Jun 11, 2015)

Adelino said:


> I miss London so I like seeing the mediocre photos  I agree it will be interesting to see what some great pros can do.



That's how I feel too.


----------



## PureClassA (Jun 11, 2015)

These really have been some stinkers with a few decent ones thrown in. I'm not judging a thing til next week when mine arrives from Amazon and I go shot for shot with my 5D3


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jun 12, 2015)

After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.


----------



## lichtmalen (Jun 12, 2015)

KeithBreazeal said:


> After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.



Really now? What lenses do you own? A 17-40 couldn't even deliver on the 5D Mark II or III, of course it won't be the best to get everything out of the 5Ds. The lenses you read in my signature should and they are definitely below 15K and cover quite a range of applications.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Jun 12, 2015)

lichtmalen said:


> KeithBreazeal said:
> 
> 
> > After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.
> ...


I have a 7D, SL-1, & 5D III, so a mish-mash of lenses. 14mm Rokinon, 16-28 f2.8 Tokina, Canon 10-22mm, 40mm pancake, Canon24-105L, Canon 70-200L IS 2.8, Canon 100-400L IS, 300L IS 2.8 and a couple other tid-bits.


----------



## lichtmalen (Jun 12, 2015)

Well, okay. These could be a bit too low on the resolution end, maybe except of the 300. You wouldn't be very happy with the results on the new sensor, I think, it's quite demanding lens wise I would say, from what I have seen so far. I spent the last months rearranging my lenses for that reason and I think I'm good to go. It's no Otus but it should deliver.


----------



## benperrin (Jun 12, 2015)

KeithBreazeal said:


> After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.


You'll still see a resolution increase from your lenses. They just won't be quite as sharp as some of the modern L lenses but will still look better than the same lenses on a 5d3.


----------



## mb66energy (Jun 12, 2015)

KeithBreazeal said:


> After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.



I was in a similar dilemma: With
EF 2.8/24 old / 2.8 40 / 2.8 100 M USM non-IS / 2.0 100 / 70-200 4 non-IS / 5.6 400
I was not shure if they deliver on FF especially on a high res body.
After photographyblog's examples with the non-IS 100mm macro lens I am confident that that lens delivers - also 2.8 40, 2.0 100 and 5.6 400. The 70-200 4 non-IS fails on the 5D classic except above 135mm, the 2.8 24 is good enough but should be replaced for 5DS

Before you cancel your order: Can you send the body back without hassles after doing your own observations? Do some pre flight checks with the the-digital-picture tools of your lenses in comparison to alternatives - sometimes the older/simpler lenses have similar performance at optimum apertures.

Good luck for your path of decisions!

By the way: I ordered two 2nd hand 5D's of the first incarnation and I am really impressed what I can do with these 13 MPix cameras which is impossible with EOS M's 18 MPix sensor! Just 60 x 80 cm (24 x 32 inch) prints upscaled with DPP are very detailed from 40cm viewing distance ... if everything gone well during lighting, exposure, postprocessing!


----------



## Bernard (Jun 12, 2015)

benperrin said:


> KeithBreazeal said:
> 
> 
> > After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.
> ...



That's right. You will still get an improvement, regardless of what lens you use.

Those charts that calculate maximum theoretical resolution by aperture (based on diffraction) make some optimistic assumptions.

First, they assume a perfect sensor with no de-bayering. So a Foveon or Monochrom-type sensor.
Second, they assume that you will be viewing your pictures at 1:1. That means either a huge print viewed up close, or looking at a small portion of an image on a monitor.
Third, they assume that "everything else is perfect." No shake, no haze, no flare. Astro-photographers travel around the world to find these conditions!
Fourth, they assume that sharpness is the ultimate goal. That may be true if you consider photography to be a technical curiosity, but it's absurd if photography is used as a means of documentation or self-expression.

As I've told a few sharpness-obsessed photographers before: walk around the Louvre (or any other great art museum), and you'll notice that none of the pictures are really sharp! What do artists know that you don't?


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jun 12, 2015)

KeithBreazeal said:


> After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.



Don't fall into that trap. That is NOT how things work. Crappy lens on 5D3 will you give a certain output resolution. That same crappy lens on the 5Ds will still give you more output resolution than on the 5D3. There's always something to gain. I encourage you not to cancel the preorder if you really want the camera.


----------



## Andyx01 (Jun 12, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> lichtmalen said:
> 
> 
> > jonjt said:
> ...




Crop MP FF

f/2.8 96MP f/4.5
f/4.0 48MP f/6.4
f/5.6 24MP f/9.0
f/8.0 12MP f/12.7
f/11.3 6MP f/18
f/16 3MP f/25.4

Calculator: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/diffraction-photography.htm

Diffraction effects are rather complicated as different wavelengths of light are affected by varying degrees.

While 3MP sounds low, it really isn't. The sharpest picture you have ever seen on a 1080P Television is just 2MP.

In other words you would need to shoot at a smaller aperature than f/16 on a crop sensor before the effects even begin to become visible.

Put another way, viewing an image shot at f/16 on a crop or f/25.4 on a FF would show no resolution loss when displayed on a 1080p HD Display.

Hope that helps.


----------



## Andyx01 (Jun 12, 2015)

Expanding the chart:

Crop MP FF

f/1.4 384MP f/2.25
f/2.0 192MP f/3.2
f/2.8 96MP f/4.5
f/4.0 48MP f/6.4
f/5.6 24MP f/9.0
f/8.0 12MP f/12.7
f/11.3 6MP f/18
f/16 3MP f/25.4
f/22.6 1.5MP f/36
f/32 750KP f/50.8 <- Close in resolution to your average playback screen (close to 1024x768)
f/45.2 375KP f/72 <- diffraction should begin to become visible on images displayed full-screen on 1024x768 displays.

Note: the width of this window is roughly 700 px. So an image shot at f/72 on a FF or f/45.2 on a Crop - re-sized to the width of this window - should not show any signs of resolution loss due to diffraction as a 700x400 image would be only 280KP.


----------



## PureClassA (Jun 12, 2015)

You have plenty good stuff. They will all revolve better on the newer 50MP of a 5DS. May not resolve the sensor as well as some others, but you will still have a big jump.



KeithBreazeal said:


> lichtmalen said:
> 
> 
> > KeithBreazeal said:
> ...


----------



## Andyx01 (Jun 12, 2015)

I almost want to sell my 5D III and 1.4TC in favor of the 5Ds.

As far as resolving power of lenses. That information is already available - simply put the lens in question on an APS-C body and decide if the extra pixels on target add detail.

If your shooting faster than 2.8 - don't expect much of a difference without the best glass.
If your shooting slower than 8.0 - don't expect much of a difference on any glass.


----------



## Diltiazem (Jun 12, 2015)

Some better samples here. 

http://www.robertsealeblog.com/first-impressions-with-the-50-mp-canon-eos-5ds/


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Jun 13, 2015)

KeithBreazeal said:


> After reading the comments, I'm cancelling my 5DS order. I would need to spend another 15K to replace all my crappy L lenses.



You should never listen to rumors or comments, take them all like a grain of salt, look at what you going to do with what you got, a better camera body don't mean better photos. Photos are subjects, so maybe you should focus more on that. people are creating remarkable images with iphones and camera phones, dont get so caught up and carried away from fans of a brand or people that have tons of money to show off what they can buy. 

New don't mean better and guess what, I can handle what i have with my eyes closed or in the dark, no fiddling around. But use what you have to it's max and you will quickly learn you just could have more than you need.

According to what the talk is about the 5DS/R are made for tripods, come on if this is true what you got may have smaller MP but dont let that stop you from freezing time or freeze your flow.

And there is no such thing as a crappy L lens, or any lens for that matter, same hold true as for there is no best lens either, all this ranting and raving is all gimmick and marketing and people that just like to stir up this my god is better than your god stuff same rules apply with daily life, lenses will always out perform camera bodies potential, enjoy what you got and keep shooting the beauty that is out there.


----------



## klickflip (Jun 13, 2015)

Yeah not surprised at all the trolling from the recent samples shot as look pretty bad amatures snaps and not processed properly. 

So first impression they look a bit crap, but a couple of these last batch I believe actually tell quite a lot about the sensor , possibly the in cam jpeg processing . But I would normally assume the in cam jgp conversion applies NR and sharpening to produce mottled and over sharpened shots, but these look fairly neutral. 

I did DL some of the raws and I'm very happily impressed by the smoothness of tonal graduations and reduction in noise in darks (even when pushed 2 stops) that we've had to put up with for so long. I feel it will produce images almost on par with the sony sensors maybe albeit a stop less DR which can be easily handled. 

I felt the 5DIII was always a step down in image quality from the 5D II as suddenly everything went 'smirry' compared to a more precise rendering in 5DII especially when pushing processing to get some more modern look & colour shifts to images. 

However I'll wait for some more reviews and samples and check what sonynikon may be coming up with in the 45-50 mp offerings , but I think my L and sigma art primes will produce some very nice quality images with it. 

But generally feeling the question will be to keep 5D III as backup and general shooter when large files or ultimate quality is not required for jobs or sell to lessen the cost of a 5D Sr.


----------



## te1973 (Jun 15, 2015)

Canon gave the camera first to someone who only has the 17-40?
Says it all.


----------



## dolina (Jun 15, 2015)

A lot of people still use a Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM and seeing the performance of a 2003 lens on a 2015 body would be helpful to a lot of long time photogs.


----------

