# canon 5ds at www.imaging-resource.com



## Ladesir (Mar 21, 2015)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-5ds-r/canon-5ds-rA.HTM#HIGHRES


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Mar 21, 2015)

The 645Z is going to blow away everything else, if a high ISO studio or landscape camera was what I needed, I'd be giving it a high priority.


----------



## TeT (Mar 21, 2015)

article mentions comparisons at base ISO: a quick internet search resulted in ambiguous information.

What is the base ISO for the 5Ds? The Nikon 810? At what ISO does it start adding noise?

I was under the impression that GENERALLY you could go up to about 800 before you started adding substantial noise on most of the recent FF cameras...



been curious about this for awhile and have never seen the answer pop up in threads...

thanks


----------



## candc (Mar 21, 2015)

interesting comparisons. looks good. i am back on it again.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Mar 21, 2015)

I keep on my computer, Imaginresource.com samples a few years ago and compare again, where is thrown a camera with new sensor technology.

I can say that samples of Canon 5DSR seem to have more sharpness and less noise than Nikon D810. 
I also realize that 5DSR has NOT geometric artifacts in the contour of the objects, as there is in D810. 

It seems to me a true replacement for 1DS Mark iii.


----------



## zim (Mar 21, 2015)

Why is there AF differences between the S and SR ?

it seems to miss out some basic stuff like how the crop mode actually works.

Is this article accurate?


----------



## IglooEater (Mar 21, 2015)

No RAW at ISO 12,500; JPEG only. That's interesting. Anyone have an explanation for that? To my limited knowledge, any other camera can shoot raw in the extended ISO modes...


----------



## lintoni (Mar 21, 2015)

IglooEater said:


> *No RAW at ISO 12,500; JPEG only.* That's interesting. Anyone have an explanation for that? To my limited knowledge, any other camera can shoot raw in the extended ISO modes...


That's not the way I read it. I think it means that the multishot NR is only available as JPEG.


----------



## IglooEater (Mar 21, 2015)

lintoni said:


> IglooEater said:
> 
> 
> > *No RAW at ISO 12,500; JPEG only.* That's interesting. Anyone have an explanation for that? To my limited knowledge, any other camera can shoot raw in the extended ISO modes...
> ...


 Goodness you're right of course- stupid me! Comes from reading too fast. Thanks for the correction!


----------



## Triggyman (Mar 21, 2015)

The 5Ds/R's output look very very good. Can't afford more cameras and lenses though LOL.


----------



## can0nfan2379 (Mar 21, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The 645Z is going to blow away everything else, if a high ISO studio or landscape camera was what I needed, I'd be giving it a high priority.



^^^^^ This.....if I did landscape only and nothing else, the quality of the detail in the 645Z pixels is awesome.


----------



## tomscott (Mar 22, 2015)

Canon Europe have just released this promo with David Noton

https://youtu.be/cgVBqTr-gUQ


----------



## jrista (Mar 22, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The 645Z is going to blow away everything else, if a high ISO studio or landscape camera was what I needed, I'd be giving it a high priority.




Aye...the quality of the images from that camera are mind blowing. Sharp, but not with artifacts. TONS of detail. Rich deep color, incredible blacks. Not an optical aberration to be seen. Damn. That thing is a landscape photographer's dream.


----------



## VirtualRain (Mar 22, 2015)

My thoughts reading through that review... In this order...

1. What a horrible subject for a camera test... Round glass jar full of ill defined cookies? Seriously?
2. 5DS resolution is not looking that impressive. 645Z, now that's impressive.
3. 5DS noise is bad... Worse than the 3 year old 5D3 and worse than D810. It looks like a 7D2. 
4. Would not buy a 5DS
5. Next camera might be a Sony.


----------



## memoriaphoto (Mar 22, 2015)

Am I the only one noticing the D810 green color cast in the shadows whereas the 5D looks more neutral? Possibly thanks to the rumored steeper CFA (and other WB algorithms I guess). From what I've seen so far from this camera, it _seems_ like Canon has prioritized hue accuracy and balance throughout the normal ISO range. Just like the old 1Ds3.


----------



## sanj (Mar 22, 2015)

tomscott said:


> Canon Europe have just released this promo with David Noton
> 
> https://youtu.be/cgVBqTr-gUQ



Feels like a commercial. I hate that.


----------



## CreationHeart (Mar 22, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> The 645Z is going to blow away everything else, if a high ISO studio or landscape camera was what I needed, I'd be giving it a high priority.



I think there's no comparison between 645z and 5DsR...dynamic range alone will win hands down. 

I have a feeling that this 50MP 5DS will get obsolete or technologically surpassed by competition within a very short period of time. Not improving DR in high MP body is an epic fail.


----------



## lintoni (Mar 22, 2015)

VirtualRain said:


> My thoughts reading through that review... In this order...
> 
> 1. What a horrible subject for a camera test... Round glass jar full of ill defined cookies? Seriously?


As dilbert didn't answer this point, I will. It's a pepper mill.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Mar 22, 2015)

To avoid errors when comparing cameras with different lenses, i do my cropped images from Imagingresource samples, always using the same central area of the photo.
In my crop I always see the neck of bottles of the beer FIDDLER'S, olive oil MAS PORTELL, and vinegar HELLAS.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 22, 2015)

tomscott said:


> Canon Europe have just released this promo with David Noton
> 
> https://youtu.be/cgVBqTr-gUQ



Anyone notice David's histogram of the 17 TS-E shot sunlit landscape at 3:37. None of this ETTR nonsense and it makes a good demonstration of how the dynamic range of the camera copes with a scene that has shadow and sunlit clouds in it.


----------



## gsealy (Mar 22, 2015)

IMO the review should have been about landscape and architecture photos taken at low ISOs, which is the market the "R" is addressing. Instead we get closeups of jars and high ISOs. Plus it didn't tell us the lens they were using. That would have just a little impact on the comparisons being made, don't ya think?


----------



## TeT (Mar 22, 2015)

gsealy said:


> IMO the review should have been about landscape and architecture photos taken at low ISOs, which is the market the "R" is addressing. Instead we get closeups of jars and high ISOs. Plus it didn't tell us the lens they were using. That would have just a little impact on the comparisons being made, don't ya think?



add to that the different perspective for each camera (some were wider than others) on that alone the Nikon looked worse (widest) and the pentax looked the best (narrower)


----------



## martti (Mar 22, 2015)

There is some unintentional humor in the pictures shown do demonstrate the differences between the cameras tested. The technical text was OK, though. Pixelpeepers?


----------



## raptor3x (Mar 22, 2015)

gsealy said:


> IMO the review should have been about landscape and architecture photos taken at low ISOs, which is the market the "R" is addressing. Instead we get closeups of jars and high ISOs. *Plus it didn't tell us the lens they were using.* That would have just a little impact on the comparisons being made, don't ya think?



Sigma 70mm macro at f/8.


----------



## drjlo (Mar 22, 2015)

raptor3x said:


> gsealy said:
> 
> 
> > IMO the review should have been about landscape and architecture photos taken at low ISOs, which is the market the "R" is addressing. Instead we get closeups of jars and high ISOs. *Plus it didn't tell us the lens they were using.* That would have just a little impact on the comparisons being made, don't ya think?
> ...



That Sigma is one blisteringly sharp lens, sharper than the Canon 100L.


----------



## K (Mar 22, 2015)

The headshot photo of the lady as part of the official 5DS samples is pretty incredible. It is NEAR medium format quality. Real close in IQ, and for a lot of uses - I can see this camera being a poor man's medium format. Except, better AF, portability and other features. But those samples were at ISO 100 under absolute perfect conditions - which is studio conditions carefully setup by experienced pros. Hence, S for Studio. This is as good as that camera will ever get because that is what Canon themselves has chosen to be as images to show case what the camera is capable of.

However, the still life at higher ISO. Not so good. These aren't exactly envelope pushing ISO's here. And that was a shot done as a setup and in a deliberate way. Might not be absolutely ideal like the Canon samples, but it is a setup shot.

As far as noise is concerned - it does look pretty noisy. I don't care what it is, a brand new camera with new sensor of that price range being part of a pro or semi-pro line should be cleaner over ISO 400 than that camera is. The hope was they sacrificed higher ISO for cleaner low ISO. Not the case here. 


More detail is great, if you can use it. Unfortunately, most people can't use it. This thing is for creating posters, billboards and murals. Pixel peepers will love it, but it doesn't appear to have the dynamic range or low noise they also demand for their PC-only viewing appreciation of images.

Canon has created a high resolution camera for studio use only. If it doesn't have better DR, landscape shooters won't want it. You must figure, while it has great detail - most cannot use that detail. The 36MP of Nikon is plenty of detail with more DR and less noise. 810 does ISO 64 also. Landscape win goes to 810.

To make matters worse, Nikon has a real crop mode - making the 810 more useful for other kinds of shooting. 5DS is not good on noise, and can't truly crop down. This limits it too much.

I understand the idea Canon is going with is to create specialty cameras. But if this thing is only good at ISO 100 and 200 under studio conditions, that's probably too specialized to be successful. The market for this camera is too small. 

Canon is fortunate that Nikon has aging pro lenses. If Nikon would update their key pro lenses to sharpness and quality levels of Canon - combined with their 36MP sensor, they're going to really pull ahead of Canon. Right now, Nikon's lenses aren't able to make the best use of their sensors. There's a lot of room for improvement there. Nikon has a sort of quality "equity" just waiting to be tapped into.

But I digress, to get back on track -


It is appearing, at least initially, that these characteristics of its image quality are such that it is too specialized to be successful. It's one thing to geared toward a certain type of photography, and a whole other thing to be USELESS for other types of photography. Well, not really useless but definitely useless at the price point.

I think someone who buys this thing will want better quality and function for other uses too. 


But perhaps Canon doesn't mind? They essentially just jammed 50MP into a 5D3. It might be their quick and dirty way to get back into the megapixel race, satisfy a demand for a lower cost studio only DSLR and that's it. It isn't as if they engineered a new camera from scratch. They scaled up the 7D2 sensor in a 5D3 body. This also serves to act as filler, showing they're releasing newer bodies. The criticisms of Canon being slow to release new bodies was really piling up.


I don't believe this camera will be successful. Aside from some pros who will use it, the prosumer/consumer market does indeed subsidize the existence of many of these DSLR's or at least keeps them within some realm of affordability. It is this market I don't see buying into the 5DS. I don't think that many people will really care about having 50MP and that kind of detail. Better DR and Noise performance with higher ISO is more important for more shooters than all out megapixel. These shooters who buy these cameras and make the sales numbers high enough for companies like Canon to even develop and sell these cameras. Even the most fanatical, pixel peeping nerds who buy this gear will admit they can't use the detail since they aren't printing


Feed the 5DS perfect studio quality lighting and it is a champion of DSLR image quality. Go outside of that, and it is overpriced and mediocre.


One positive is that the 5DS leaves enough holes and gaps, that it almost necessitates that the 5D4 will NOT be a specialist camera, but will be a do-all, multi-purpose pro DSLR. It they don't, Canon has surely surrendered being a leader in camera bodies and intends on riding the quality of their lenses instead. That is a bad idea, as at some point, Nikon will wake up and put out higher resolution 24-70, 70-200 and others. Then there is no reason to own a Canon except for ergonomics, and at that point - I think a lot of people will be able to overcome that and switch over.


----------



## CaptureWhatYouSee (Mar 22, 2015)

RAW's are available

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-5ds-r/canon-5ds-rA7.HTM


----------



## RobertG. (Mar 22, 2015)

sanj said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Europe have just released this promo with David Noton
> ...



It is a commercial. Nothing more, nothing less. What else should be the purpose such a video by Canon? A critical review? By Canon?


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 22, 2015)

dilbert said:


> 5Ds = full frame version of the 7D2.



You're wrong, as usual. If it were, I'd probably buy one.


----------



## TeT (Mar 22, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > 5Ds = full frame version of the 7D2.
> ...



5DS/R feels niche, and from what I have seen that is what they are marketing it towards... and; the niche users that we have heard from so far really like it ALOT.

its not a competitor or an upgrade to the 5DIII or a FF complement to the 7DII; its a different camera with totally different specifications geared towards studio and landscape professionals.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 22, 2015)

TeT said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Yes, which is why I'm not going to buy one.


----------



## Act444 (Mar 22, 2015)

I think the 5DS holds its own but of course, there was no competing with MF. 

Slightly disappointed with the high ISO, but it's not a surprise. That's the price paid for more resolution. However, this could be a phenomenal outdoors camera...


----------



## unfocused (Mar 22, 2015)

K said:


> It is appearing, at least initially, that these characteristics of its image quality are such that it is too specialized to be successful...
> 
> ...I don't believe this camera will be successful. Aside from some pros who will use it, the prosumer/consumer market does indeed subsidize the existence of many of these DSLR's or at least keeps them within some realm of affordability. It is this market I don't see buying into the 5DS. I don't think that many people will really care about having 50MP and that kind of detail.



To be successful, a product must recover its costs and earn a profit for the company. Since we have no idea what the costs are for this camera and no one knows what its sales will be like, I don't know how anyone can predict whether or not the camera will be successful. 

The 5Ds was never meant to be a mass market, general purpose camera. It's a niche camera for a niche market. Canon, like most companies, conducts extensive market research before releasing a product. If their market research showed it would not be profitable, they would not have taken it to market.

What we do know is that there is a substantial design overlap with the 5DIII, suggesting that Canon will have some savings in parts and manufacturing and probably some ability to adjust their production to reflect variations in demand. [/quote]



K said:


> ...it almost necessitates that the 5D4 will NOT be a specialist camera, but will be a do-all, multi-purpose pro DSLR.



Thanks Captain Obvious.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 23, 2015)

K said:


> This is as good as that camera will ever get because that is what Canon themselves has chosen to be as images to show case what the camera is capable of.



While the first half of your sentence may be correct, the reasoning is flimsy. Canon's sample images are, more often than not, underwhelming. Sometimes they don't even provide them. It's as if images are an afterthought in their marketing department, which is odd given their product line.


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 23, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> Canon's sample images are, more often than not, underwhelming.



The image being discussed is only the second image - ever - that Canon has provided that I thought was a pretty good example of the camera's performance.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's sample images are, more often than not, underwhelming.
> ...



I haven't bothered looking, but I'll take that as an agreement


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 23, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > 3kramd5 said:
> ...



Yes.

http://canon-premium.webcdn.stream.ne.jp/www09/canon-premium/eosd/samples/eos5ds/downloads/01.jpg


----------



## Act444 (Mar 23, 2015)

Real world samples up - knock yourself out: 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/canon-5ds-r/canon-5ds-rGALLERY.HTM

One thing is clear - this thing will demand the very best of lenses - even the very good 24-70 II is being pushed to its limits in some shots - and a good amount of stability too.


----------



## zlatko (Mar 23, 2015)

CreationHeart said:


> I think there's no comparison between 645z and 5DsR...dynamic range alone will win hands down.
> 
> I have a feeling that this 50MP 5DS will get obsolete or technologically surpassed by competition within a very short period of time. Not improving DR in high MP body is an epic fail.



I have a feeling that real photographers will make epic great photos with the 5DS, as they have with various current and past Canon cameras. "Not improving DR" hardly matters because the cameras provide plenty of DR for most uses. Canon surpasses the competition in significant other ways, but people who are DR-obsessed only notice DR.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 23, 2015)

Lee Jay said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



Yah, that's more effort than I've seen them put into promo shots (well, those which aren't pictures of gear anyway).

Looks like a little back focus, but a lot of potential. I'm going to take delivery of my 5DS and put it through my own paces. If it meets my expectations of value, I'll keep it. If not, that's why I have a good relationship with a local shop


----------



## Perio (Mar 23, 2015)

dilbert said:


> VirtualRain said:
> 
> 
> > My thoughts reading through that review... In this order...
> ...



Look forward to your purchase of Sony camera. Hopefully then you'll stop complaining about Canon. Seriously, if you don't like Canon, then why do you torture yourself? Is Canon paying you to use Canon gear?


----------



## unfocused (Mar 23, 2015)

Perio said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > VirtualRain said:
> ...



You assume he uses Canon. I have my doubts. If he does it appears to be minimal.


----------



## SoullessPolack (Mar 23, 2015)

I'm not going to bash on people who may or may not own a Canon. Whatever. This is a forum. We come here to discuss.

That being said, I have to question those people who constantly go on and on about dynamic range. Particularly the people who say that the 5Ds will not even make a good landscape camera because of the decreased dynamic range in comparison to the D810 and A7R. Have these people actually done landscape work? I'm not talking here and there. I'm talking on a consistent basis. I have. I still use a 5D2 because the 3 wasn't a big enough jump in resolution. That's a 7 year old camera. I have also used my friend's D810 and 14-24 which he was kind enough to lend me for a recent week trip down the OR/CA coast and another week in the Sierras. It is true the Nikon packs more DR. However, this increased DR is rarely as useful as some people would have you believe. 

During the daytime, there's no difference in general. The one time where there was an advantage to the Nikon vs Canon was in a rather dense forest during a cloudless day. In general, the forest was dark, but of course sunlight peaked in through the trees and leaves. These were pretty bright hotspots. In post, the Nikon handled it better than the Canon, and looked much closer to what my eyes saw one I raised the shadows. That being said, it's still a daytime picture, with sun, in a dense forest. It's very hard to make such a scene look great, no matter how much DR you have. Some things just don't translate well onto camera.

During sunset/sunrise, there was no situation where the camera really made a difference. A lot of times, the Canon could deal with the dynamic range. As bad as everyone says it is, it still can be pushed a bit in the shadows, just not as much as the Nikon. Typically though, the Canon camera can handle the scenes. There are certain scenes which it can't. I'm talking about facing towards the sunset, as the sun sets behind a mountain. These are scenes were you have intensely bright sky, combined with the dark backside of a mountain receiving no direct light. In these situations, even the Nikon couldn't get it right, and I had to bracket (actually I just take 2, never found a need for 3 separate exposures). Another situation I came upon that the Canon couldn't handle was at the ocean. There was a setting sun. There was also a hole in the rocks near the ocean, with water at the bottom, obviously a product of the powerful erosion forces. Needless to say, this was a dark hole (whatever you want to call it), with no direct light hitting it. Guess what? The Nikon needed to be bracketed also.

I'm not saying there's no situations where the Canon won't be able to get a proper picture but the Nikon will. Those situations do exist. But they're quite a lot more rare than some of these DR-fanatics believe, or perhaps they simply lack the skill in post processing. But even in those situations, we can still just take a second exposure to account for the lack of light. Even on the Nikon, in many cases, I took two pictures, because a properly exposed photo of a dark area is still leagues better than simply raising the shadows.

This is all to say, in my 9 years of being a landscape photographer, I have not once come across a scene that I couldn't photograph due to dynamic range. Sometimes I have to take a second shot. This is pretty much a non-issue though. Click the shutter again. The fanatics on the forum always come up with some hypothetical situation where multiple exposures would not work, such as the wind blowing fiercely on brightly lit trees with a dark unlit mountain in the background, or any other multitudes of ideas (and I've heard a lot), but in real world practice, this has never came up as an issue. There's always a workaround, and it has always been easy. Usually, it's just snapping another photo at an increased duration.

That said, I welcome any improvements to DR. They won't change anything drastically, but it also won't hurt any. However, as a landscape photographer, what I *am* buying this upcoming camera for is the massive increase in resolution. *That* is not as easy to account for as DR. Of course, I can do stitches. But that is more tedious in both set up and in post processing than simply accounting for DR.


----------



## SwnSng (Mar 23, 2015)

SoullessPolack said:


> I'm not going to bash on people who may or may not own a Canon. Whatever. This is a forum. We come here to discuss.
> 
> That being said, I have to question those people who constantly go on and on about dynamic range. Particularly the people who say that the 5Ds will not even make a good landscape camera because of the decreased dynamic range in comparison to the D810 and A7R. Have these people actually done landscape work? I'm not talking here and there. I'm talking on a consistent basis. I have. I still use a 5D2 because the 3 wasn't a big enough jump in resolution. That's a 7 year old camera. I have also used my friend's D810 and 14-24 which he was kind enough to lend me for a recent week trip down the OR/CA coast and another week in the Sierras. It is true the Nikon packs more DR. However, this increased DR is rarely as useful as some people would have you believe.
> 
> ...



You make to much sense and you will end up getting sick of this forum because of all the DR obsessed folks on here who complain more and more about smaller and smaller things. It's fine I guess if everyone was the same it would be a pretty boring place. With that said the 5DR/S is just to specialized and expensive for me to bite on upgrading from my Mkiii at this time.


----------



## bgoyette (Mar 23, 2015)

I'm a little suspicious of this test. Specifically the comparisons the D810 and the 5dR. Looking at the Exif data, we see that supposedly the images are shot with the same lens. But the canon version is showing some small but significant chromatic aberration in the margins, whereas the nikon image shows none. Strangely, IR has chosen an area in the margins to use as their primary comparison. That, combined with the sharpening level of the 810 being higher is generally giving a false impression in this comparison. Obviously they are not the same lens (unless the sigma comes with an interchangeable mount?)..Either the canon version is a poor copy of the sigma 70mm 2.8, or the nikon image has undergone some correction. It's also clear that the canon isn't focused as well on that peppermill as the nikon is. 

As for the noise, while it's expected that the higher pixel density canon would have higher noise at high ISO than the nikon, what I'm seeing is simply a higher level of NR on the D810, as the noise characteristic of that camera seems less consistent and "dirtier" than the canon sample. 

Finally, looking at the iso 100 samples of the Pentax, there seems to be little difference compared to the Canon, except, again, that the pentax is sharpened a little more. 

So far, on this test, the canon is certainly holding it's own against it's competitors. I'm interested in seeing some skintones and some real world dynamic range tests.


----------



## bgoyette (Mar 23, 2015)

Just went and pulled the nikon 6400 jpg file with -0- noise reduction and compared it to the same on the canon. I'd say the nikon has higher chroma noise and chunkier, less consistent luma noise in the darker mid-tones when the files are equalized for size. (nikon on the right).


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 23, 2015)

SoullessPolack said:


> However, this increased DR is rarely as useful as some people would have you believe.



Indeed, I've stated that for years. Even in the contrived shots some members post to demonstrate the utility of more DR, it's obvious – for example, in interior shots comparing the 5DIII and a7R to show the better shadow-lifting with Exmor, the windows in the scene were completely blown out so clearly bracketing was needed with either camera. 

But...DRones gonna DRone. :


----------



## lintoni (Mar 23, 2015)

bgoyette said:


> Just went and pulled the nikon 6400 jpg file with -0- noise reduction and compared it to the same on the canon. I'd say the nikon has higher chroma noise and chunkier, less consistent luma noise in the darker mid-tones when the files are equalized for size. (nikon on the right).


It looks to me like the Nikon photo was taken at a higher ambient temperature than the Canon one (expansion of oil in bottle), which might disadvantage the Nikon a little re noise.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 23, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> SoullessPolack said:
> 
> 
> > However, this increased DR is rarely as useful as some people would have you believe.
> ...


You're kidding me - DR is the answer to ALL photographic problems and will make us all better photographers, dare I say, experts! I say this because ALL pros now use Sony sensors in their camera, and nothing you've seen published in the last several years was shot with a Canon camera. Right???

We lowly Canon shooters have to be content worrying about things like content, composition, focus, exposure, shutter speed, depth or field, etc. - pesky things that have very little to do with the final output.


----------



## Light_Pilgrim (Mar 23, 2015)

In my opinion there are much bigger things to worry about 5Ds/R than DR:
- Your lens line up
- Your storage 
- How you used to take pictures....tripod will be your best friend from now on

It will really lead to a change of habits. DR will not be an issue at all. Based on what I discussed with a couple of Professionals, they see this camera as a replacement of 1Ds MKIII, not at all an evolution of 5D series. 

There will be 5D MKIV.


----------



## mackguyver (Mar 23, 2015)

Light_Pilgrim said:


> Based on what I discussed with a couple of Professionals, they see this camera as a replacement of 1Ds MKIII, not at all an evolution of 5D series.


The "s" in the name is no accident.


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 23, 2015)

mackguyver said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > SoullessPolack said:
> ...


When I was looking to purchase DSLR, I checked out Sony forums to understand upgrade options for kit lens (growing beyond kit lens). Not sure if something changed now. There was no general purpose lens available for upgrading from kit lens (something like 17-50 F2.8 ) . Some people recommended some expensive f/4 lens and some F2.8 17mm sigma prime. There are some using sigma 17-50 canon one with adapter which was the best portable option. Lens reviews on photozone are not great either even with exmor sensor with exceptional DR. Particularly those kit lens were very bad. Not sure if situation any different for sony FF.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 23, 2015)

The EF mount, menu system, 5 series ergonomics and construction quality are all more critical features to me than just DR. Again, this isn't a walkin' around camera, and it wont be for me either. This is for studio work in controlled situations, and it looks great for that.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 23, 2015)

K said:


> It is appearing, at least initially, that these characteristics of its image quality are such that it is too specialized to be successful... I don't believe this camera will be successful.



First day for pre-orders. Number Six on Amazon's best selling DSLR list. How would you like your crow prepared?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 23, 2015)

unfocused said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > It is appearing, at least initially, that these characteristics of its image quality are such that it is too specialized to be successful... I don't believe this camera will be successful.
> ...



RAW, of course.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 23, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



And I'm happy to be among those statistics! My other Canon bodies will have a new brother. When the 1DX2 comes out, they'll have a new Daddy too


----------



## zlatko (Mar 23, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> 2. If it means the sales actually are great that is actually a very bad thing since it means Canon will feel safe to keep going on as is and doing stuff like crippling Crop Modes and using sensors made on 10D era fabs. I fail to see why Canon users should great that with over the top glee and excitement, at best, one might simply not care, but to celebrate it like it's something fantastic.... it's kind of like if your favorite sports team's owner had decided to start pocketing most revenue and not putting it into the team and began selling off the big stars and home grown heroes and your team went from play off bound each year to a .500 team and then.... you leap up and joy for joy and are celebrate that with glee and go on about how that's so awesome because well the attendance has managed to only fall off at the same fairly large rate as it has for the other teams in the area.



Canon certainly isn't "going on as is". I don't know what you're talking about with "10D era sensor fabs" because Canon's current cameras are far better in every way than the 10D, sensor included. Who cares what "sensor fabs" they're using as long as the image quality is excellent — which it is. All you have to do to see that is make some pictures. Canon makes some great gear, and many photographers make great pics with Canon gear. If it doesn't work for you, why the heck are you using Canon gear (if you are)?


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 23, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



It probably means it is selling quite well despite your dire predictions.

I doubt if many buyers of the 5DS/R are bothered about crop modes as, unlike the Nikon cameras, the crop only lenses (EF-s) are not supported so the functionality is greatly limited.

As for fabrication processes, it is my understanding that even though there are companies that take these sensors apart, how they are actually made, and what on, is proprietary and privileged information that I am sure you are not privy to. 

I am no fanboy, but if you can't take good to superb images with the Canon system I suggest you either, buy into another manufacturer or take some lessons. I do not know of a single speciality that Canon don't have a strong professional presence. As true analytical experts regularly point out it isn't about the small differences in DR/iso/lens selection etc etc that make the differences to the images, it is about the photographers.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 23, 2015)

There is quite apparently a very fine line (as shown by Canon sales figures) that while even the happiest Canon user may mildly opine about having a dynamic range more competitive with Sony (or whatever other longing there may be) it does not apparently mean they are UNHAPPY with Canon.

I am one of these. Sure, would a bit lower noise and an extra couple stops of DR be great, even if just to shut up the trolls? Yes. Does it mean my cameras have suddenly become worthless and my photography relegated to a cowpie? No. I love my system. I love my glass. People like me have a need/desire for this type of Canon body that will greatly enhance the work we already do, and we are obviously seeing a cost benefit to this beyond just a Sched C depreciation on our tax returns.

The Sony Alpha forum is already of course denouncing this camera as being inferior to the impending Sony Exmor 50MP. Frankly I couldn't care less. I'm not going to sit here and crap on the Sony. They make some very nice cameras. 

But that doesn't mean I'm pissed off at Canon or their products.


----------



## zlatko (Mar 23, 2015)

There was a long post here that just *disappeared*, so I can't respond to it. Anyway ... ask this guy (Sebastiao Salgado) how much his photos were "compromised" by using "old fab" Canon sensors:
http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/sebastio-salgados-journey-from-brazil-to-the-world/
And if you get a chance, check out his magnificent book, Genesis.

This forum sees a constant barrage of criticism about Canon's "sensor fab". This criticism extends to how Canon chooses to "invest" and even to how Canon "thinks" or whether Canon "cares". This speculation is somehow extrapolated and imagined from a specific measure of dynamic range. I don't know anything about their factories or how they invest or what they think or care about. I don't know any photographers who ever talk about "sensor fab" or for whom "fab" is anything but an abbreviation for "*faboulous*". (Did anyone every talk about "film fab"?) But I do know Canon cameras pretty well and what can be done with them. The evidence is in professional work all around the world. That puts all of this "sensor fab" criticism to rest.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 23, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > K said:
> ...



It means that a substantial number of people are interested in buying the 5Ds. YAPODFC – foiled again!


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 24, 2015)

zlatko said:


> There was a long post here that just *disappeared*, so I can't respond to it.



I deleted it (and my other posts) since it's useless to get sucked into all the nonsense here, bye.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 24, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > There was a long post here that just *disappeared*, so I can't respond to it.
> ...



Either that, or you can't admit that the one metric you hold so dear is nowhere as important to the majority of users or purchasers as other features where the Canon system vastly out performs the competition.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 24, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...



No, that couldn't be it at all. Not at all. : : :


----------



## unfocused (Mar 24, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...



I never quite understand this sort of thing. People post an opinion. Others disagree. It gets debated. 

Isn't that what a forum is all about?

Some time back, Private and I had a good go round about the 600 RT. We disagreed, but didn't feel the need to insult or pout or claim we were being picked on for speaking the truth. We are all big kids here.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 24, 2015)

unfocused said:


> People post an opinion. Others disagree. It gets debated.
> 
> Isn't that what a forum is all about?



once upon a time


----------



## K (Mar 24, 2015)

Preorder sales numbers are always wildly inflated as many people preorder from several retailers in order to increase the odds they get their hands on the camera earlier. 

Also, Amazon isn't basing that on all-time sales. If that were the case, then the 5DS in preorder alone has surpassed the total sales numbers of the 5D3. Whomever believes that hasn't got a clue.

Apparently, some people here have no idea of internet sales and marketing works.


----------



## MichaelHodges (Mar 24, 2015)

I still see a lot of rationalization going on regarding Canon's dynamic range.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 24, 2015)

K said:


> Apparently, some people here have no idea of internet sales and marketing works.



I think people understand it a lot better than you think.



K said:


> Preorder sales numbers are always wildly inflated as many people preorder from several retailers in order to increase the odds they get their hands on the camera earlier.



Wow, that's an interesting rationalization that contradicts your bold prediction that this camera would be a failure. 

People are so desperate to get their hands on the camera that they place orders with multiple retailers, yet the camera is a failure? 

Even if such behavior occurs, it is irrelevant because we are only referencing one retailer's orders. If a buyer ultimately takes delivery from B&H or Adorama, they are still taking delivery.

Pre-sales are high with a new release, not because of multiple orders but because of pent-up demand. 

It's too early to know for sure, of course, but robust pre-sales at nearly $4,000 a pop seems to refute your prediction of failure.



K said:


> ...Amazon isn't basing that on all-time sales. If that were the case, then the 5DS in preorder alone has surpassed the total sales numbers of the 5D3. Whomever believes that hasn't got a clue.



Or perhaps, anyone who thinks someone would believe that doesn't have a clue. 

Amazon uses rolling sales figures. It an effective way to get an accurate picture of changing opinions or behavior.

They select a set time period and add in the latest numbers at the front end, while rolling off the numbers at the back end. Like all surveys, it's a snapshot in time, but it's a bit more accurate than simply picking a single arbitrary point in time.

BTW, as of this post, it has now gone to #2. 

Is it really so painful to just admit that your prediction was wrong?


----------



## Lee Jay (Mar 24, 2015)

MichaelHodges said:


> I still see a lot of rationalization going on regarding Canon's dynamic range.



If it really mattered, you wouldn't. It doesn't.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 24, 2015)

MichaelHodges said:


> I still see a lot of rationalization going on regarding Canon's dynamic range.



I don't, I see Canon users who freely accept that Canon sensors do not return the DR of their competition accepting the fact that even these new cameras don't, and just not caring too much. I am sure every 5DS/R buyer would appreciate more DR, but the fact that they haven't got it, or ever had it, isn't going to stop them trying to get the best out of their new cameras that integrate so well with their unique system. Heck the 5DS/R even share body plates and battery grips! That is unheard of in the money gouging accessory arena, both first and third party.

Prior to very recently if a keen photographer had wanted to get serious and get the best kit for a stab at a landscape print career (amongst other uses) everybody should have pointed them to a D810 and a 14-24, now with our hands on our hearts we can say they should also take a look at the 5DSR and 11-24, how is that not stunningly good news? I know that in a tradeoff between a couple of stops of DR in a relatively undynamic predominantly tripod mounted shooting environment, and more MP and a wider fov, I'd take the latter combo every time.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 24, 2015)

The only irrational behavior I see are those who constantly harp on one single aspect of these cameras AND get frustrated when others among us just don't react the same way because while we may acknowledge that to be the truth...we just don't care all that much. Congrats to Sony for making a sensor that performs a bit better than Canon. They make nice stuff. Apart from those sensors, Sony makes nothing in a camera I find the least bit appealing. Their build quality is inferior, battery life, ergonomics, menu system... all terrible by comparison in my opinion. Others like it. THAT'S OK! I really want an A7s for video! But nothing I'd use everyday for critical work.... 

And Nikon frankly, now that they don't even make their own sensors in their flagship cameras anymore, they produce nothing whatsoever that I personally find competitive with anything of Canon's outside of their glass.

DR may be the most important factor on earth to some, but not to most. If DR was really what I needed, I'm going for the 645Z. But for $3900 instead of $13000 I can get great 35mm performance.


----------



## quod (Mar 24, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> But...DRones gonna DRone. :


CLowns gotta CLown? Get over it already.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 24, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> anyway I can't take forums seriously anymore, just gotta  and move along



Yes, you deleted your posts and said 'bye' earlier in this thread. Yet you're still here, hypocritically refusing (or possibly unable) to heed your own advice.


----------



## VirtualRain (Mar 24, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> The only irrational behavior I see are those who constantly harp on one single aspect of these cameras AND get frustrated when others among us just don't react the same way because while we may acknowledge that to be the truth...we just don't care all that much. Congrats to Sony for making a sensor that performs a bit better than Canon. They make nice stuff. Apart from those sensors, Sony makes nothing in a camera I find the least bit appealing. Their build quality is inferior, battery life, ergonomics, menu system... all terrible by comparison in my opinion. Others like it. THAT'S OK! I really want an A7s for video! But nothing I'd use everyday for critical work....
> 
> And Nikon frankly, now that they don't even make their own sensors in their flagship cameras anymore, they produce nothing whatsoever that I personally find competitive with anything of Canon's outside of their glass.
> 
> DR may be the most important factor on earth to some, but not to most. If DR was really what I needed, I'm going for the 645Z. But for $3900 instead of $13000 I can get great 35mm performance.



I love all the same things about Canon that you do, and I'd add their amazing selection of lenses to the list.

However, Canon seems stuck in a rut with their sensor technology - unable to innovate or even push their current tech in substantive ways. 

One one hand, Sony's got an amazing rage of sensors from 12MP and 400K ISO to 35MP with well controlled noise (and probably a 50MP sensor around the corner that's probably going to shame the 5DS). And on the other hand, Smartphones with "good enough" image quality, integrated connectivity, editing, sharing and touch screens are eating their low-end lunch... And all they can come up with is... let's put a scaled-up 7D sensor in a 5D body. Seriously? That's all they got?

Now, maybe they're smarter than most of their customers and laughing all the way to the bank with a high margin camera that cost them virtually zero to bring to market. But I think anyone that really needs 50MP, already has a medium format camera like the 645Z. Do you think all the MF guys are suddenly going to dump their systems and buy a 5DS? No... Not with the results this camera is producing... No way. So who's going to buy this? People that have always dreamed of shooting with a MF system but couldn't afford it? Jeez... these folks are in for some disappointment.

As a 20-year fan of Canon, I really think they have run out of innovation. I'm really disappointed. I wish it were different, but I'll be surprised if Canon is still around in another 20 years if they keep going like this.

Personal anecdote: I saw a wedding photo shoot at the Quay here on the weekend, while I didn't get too close, the backup photographer had a Canon DSLR (as noted by the strap), the primary photographer was using a Sony Mirrorless (obvious from the orange/red ring at the lens mount).


----------



## plam_1980 (Mar 24, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...



But in an equal way you are dismissing some people's right to be unhappy with these products. I am not saying that either opinion is right or wrong, everyone is right for himself. But some of the comments, especially Neuro's, are rather insulting. I used to admire his expertise and sense of humor before, but lately he looks really agressive in defnding Canon. I think that constructive criticism is more valuable than blind adoration

Just for information - I am not interested in buying either of these cameras so DR is not an issue to me at all, but I don't like the tone of discussion. I am not OK with "If you are not happy, hide yourself" remarks


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 24, 2015)

plam_1980 said:


> I am not OK with "If you are not happy, hide yourself" remarks



I don't think anyone is suggesting that, everyone is certainly welcome to express their opinion. If someone were to say, "I am not interested in this camera unless it has more DR than previous Canon cameras," or, "I am unhappy with this camera because it doesn't meet my needs," no one should argue the point. But when people start claiming, "This camera will be a failure unless it has more DR than previous Canon cameras," or, ""There's no market for this camera," there's going to be pushback. When an individual has made such claims for the past several Canon releases – which have been commercial successes – they simply end up looking foolish. If you want to condone foolishness, that's your prerogative.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Mar 24, 2015)

I guess what is most frustrating to me is the fact that most people arguing don't seem to even understand the difference between 13.4 stops of DR and 11.5 stops of DR at ISO 100. They also just say "less DR" in a general fashion and don't realize that DR changes as ISO changes.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 24, 2015)

VirtualRain said:


> But I think anyone that really needs 50MP, already has a medium format camera like the 645Z.



Of course, if that were true, then all the MF manufacturers should close up shop since they've fully saturated the market.



VirtualRain said:


> Do you think all the MF guys are suddenly going to dump their systems and buy a 5DS?



No, why would they? 



VirtualRain said:


> So who's going to buy this?



People who want higher resolution but can not justify the expense of MF, people who have myriad canon lenses, people who want to shoot higher resolution in focal lengths MF can't touch, etc.

Who cares?


----------



## zlatko (Mar 24, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> But when people start claiming, "This camera will be a failure unless it has more DR than previous Canon cameras," or, ""There's no market for this camera," there's going to be pushback.



I'd add to that ... when people start predicting doom and gloom for Canon because they're "not innovating" ... there's going to be pushback.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 24, 2015)

bdunbar79 said:


> I guess what is most frustrating to me is the fact that most people arguing don't seem to even understand the difference between 13.4 stops of DR and 11.5 stops of DR at ISO 100. They also just say "less DR" in a general fashion and don't realize that DR changes as ISO changes.



I was led to believe that almost everyone takes pictures with bare silicon sensors at ISO 100. Is that not true?!?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 24, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> I was led to believe that almost everyone takes pictures with bare silicon sensors at ISO 100. Is that not true?!?



They'd be fools. Bare silicon is substantially better at ISO64.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Mar 24, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > I guess what is most frustrating to me is the fact that most people arguing don't seem to even understand the difference between 13.4 stops of DR and 11.5 stops of DR at ISO 100. They also just say "less DR" in a general fashion and don't realize that DR changes as ISO changes.
> ...


I do less than 1% of my photos at ISO100, but always use a camera out of the sensor, and a lens in front of it. 8)


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 24, 2015)

No surprise the Pentax 645z is still resolution king out of these 3.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 24, 2015)

No. Not everyone who "really needs 50MP" has bought or is buying a 645z. I would LOVE to own one, but the fact is they are $8500 before I buy a single lens, and the one I'd want for the work I would do with it is another $5000. I can't justify $13000 for my needs, nor can the vast majority of photographers. However, there are a lot more of us who CAN justify $3800 for the same resolution, understanding completely that we obviously will NOT be getting performance on par with the option that costs $5000 more for the body and $10000 more if you need a lens, which most everyone would...

As I've already discussed, 50MP that can mount native to my lens collection will be huge boon to my work, and I'm perfectly content with the fact that this is not a camera that is highly versatile outside a studio or well lit environments. 

By the way, Canon DOES innovate. They just don't bring all their cool party tricks to production. We need to be clear on this distinction. Canon, for example, does have a sensor design patent just like Sony's with on board ADCs in a column parallel configuration. For one reason or another, we haven't seen it produced for the market yet. My suspicions are the enormous costs involved in retooling their entire fabrication process to make this happen. I think we will see it at some point, but not yet. Maybe a big surprise for the 1DX2? Who knows. The fact remains that Canon will continue to sell lots of DSLRs regardless and this new 5DSR generation is obviously no exception.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 24, 2015)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > bdunbar79 said:
> ...



Well I do more than 99% of mine at 100 ISO, and my decision on whether or not to buy a 5Ds ( and I think with me it would be the 's', not 'sr'), would not be influenced one jot by the inclusion of a sony sensor with '13.4' stops range, or even a Canon one for that matter. The whole 13 vs 11 debate is Internet driven drivel. 11 is more than enough to cover _everything_ but the light source itself. And guess what ? 13 is more than enough to cover _everything_ but the light source itself. That about sums it up, with the exeption of a few people who want to severely under expose to record a little more detail in the light source and then push shadows, giving themselves the impression that they have more Dynamic range when infact it is more latitude.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 24, 2015)

zlatko said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > But when people start claiming, "This camera will be a failure unless it has more DR than previous Canon cameras," or, ""There's no market for this camera," there's going to be pushback.
> ...



You guys pretty much took the words out of my mouth. Can't resist adding also that those who claim Canon isn't innovating conveniently ignore all the innovations they don't personally care about.


----------



## zlatko (Mar 24, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> ajfotofilmagem said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



Well said. Thank you.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 24, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> No surprise the Pentax 645z is still resolution king out of these 3.



And for anybody with half a brain that is no surprise at all. I have said for ever, and been criticized for it regularly, sensor area trumps pretty much everything, there will always be a difference between APS and 135 format cameras, and that is just as applicable to the difference between 135 and 'medium format' sensor sizes.

If you need MF then 135 will not do, just as if you need 135 then APS will not do. For the vast majority of people, the vast majority of time APS is more than capable of delivering the IQ and image characteristics we actually need.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 24, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > No surprise the Pentax 645z is still resolution king out of these 3.
> ...



Yes. For a while I was worried the 42MP Nokia Smartphone was winning the sensor wars.... :


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 24, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



You might well roll your eyes, just look through my posting history to see the battles I have had trying to point out the simple concept that all pixels are not equal.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 24, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



And let us not soon forget the powerhouse professional's choice of the 42MP Sigma Merrill Foven


----------



## RLPhoto (Mar 24, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > No surprise the Pentax 645z is still resolution king out of these 3.
> ...


I don't understand why others would peck you at that fact.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 24, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Neither do I.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 24, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > PureClassA said:
> ...



Ah the joys of marketing, even if you count the native 14.8MP three times, which they do, I still don't get how they are allowed to call it 46MP, but there you go, caveat emptor.


----------



## VirtualRain (Mar 24, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> plam_1980 said:
> 
> 
> > I am not OK with "If you are not happy, hide yourself" remarks
> ...





zlatko said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > But when people start claiming, "This camera will be a failure unless it has more DR than previous Canon cameras," or, ""There's no market for this camera," there's going to be pushback.
> ...






unfocused said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



I'd like some push-back on reply #76


----------



## unfocused (Mar 24, 2015)

VirtualRain said:


> I'd like some push-back on reply #76



Sure. 



> However, Canon seems stuck in a rut with their sensor technology - unable to innovate or even push their current tech in substantive ways.



Dual Pixel seems pretty innovative to me. Is this offered by Sony? 



> One one hand, Sony's got an amazing rage of sensors from 12MP and 400K ISO to 35MP with well controlled noise.



I haven't personally used any of the Sony's, but from the test results I've seen, I'm not sure I would agree that Sony is any better at controlling noise than Canon. They have used low megapixel sensors to improve noise performance at high ISO and their high megapixel sensors don't seem to test out all that great. Nothing unusually innovative there – probably because physics is a stubborn thing.



> And on the other hand, Smartphones with "good enough" image quality, integrated connectivity, editing, sharing and touch screens are eating their low-end lunch...



The only thing I would disagree with there, is that all the other camera manufacturers have done an equally lousy job of integrating basic connectivity and touch technology into their cameras. They all should be embarrassed by that and they deserve the market losses they are all suffering.



> But I think anyone that really needs 50MP, already has a medium format camera like the 645Z. Do you think all the MF guys are suddenly going to dump their systems and buy a 5DS? No... Not with the results this camera is producing... No way. So who's going to buy this? People that have always dreamed of shooting with a MF system but couldn't afford it? Jeez... these folks are in for some disappointment.



You might be right. But I would be willing to bet that Canon did some market research before bringing the latest models to market. The pre-sales seem pretty strong, so someone must be buying them. 



> I'll be surprised if Canon is still around in another 20 years if they keep going like this.



I'd would sooner bet on Canon and Nikon, both of whom have weathered downturns in the market many times before, than I would on Sony. I've invested in Canon in part because I do think they will be around for another 20 years or so (I'm just hoping I am as well). But, in the end, it's just our best guesses, backed up by our willingness to express confidence by buying into a line of cameras.



> Personal anecdote: I saw a wedding photo shoot at the Quay here on the weekend, while I didn't get too close, the backup photographer had a Canon DSLR (as noted by the strap), the primary photographer was using a Sony Mirrorless (obvious from the orange/red ring at the lens mount).



I really don't trust anecdotes. They are too susceptible to confirmation bias and too random. I don't really pay attention to what other photographers use, but if I do notice, it seems most photographers I see are still using either Canon or Nikon.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 24, 2015)

Ladesir said:


> Im surprised what lack of knowledge some people has about DR and the meaning of exposure latitude
> and what it means to reproduce an image.
> 
> I would like to have the same exposure latitude in my Canon cameras as Nikon have now when we have 50Mp resolution.
> sorry to say but few here have a very narrow view of what DR and exposure latitude means in reality



From 400iso up you do. People understand more than you give them credit for, raised shadows are raised shadows, they do not have the colour and tonality of correctly exposed mid tones.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Mar 24, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> LetTheRightLensIn said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...


Given 20 Lego-bricks you have at least two options:
Option A: Spend your time complaining that you are unable to build a wall 21 Lego-bricks high. 
Option B: Or you could spend the rest of your life creating unique configurations and not even come close to exhausting all the possibilities. (20 x 19 x 18 x 17 x 16 x 15...etc)


----------



## K (Mar 24, 2015)

unfocused said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently, some people here have no idea of internet sales and marketing works.
> ...




:


Demand: 10 willing and ready buyers
Supply: 10 retailers accepting pre-orders.

If each buyer preorders from one retailer - the total predorder demand is 10.

If each buyer preoders from ALL retailers, the total preorder demand is now 100.

In the end, only 10 cameras will be bought. However, those cherry picking preorder stats, might be misinformed thinking the demand is greater.

Not everyone will preorder from several sources, but some will. Some retailers will receive less preorders than others from unique buyers who are only attempting to do business with them. Stores that have lenient policies will attract the most preorders. Amazon is one of those.

Either way, the numbers are inflated.

Next,

Yes, Amazon uses a snapshot. Most preorder items out there, even those which fail or are mediocre in sales, show strong preorder numbers. It also isn't beyond Amazon to fudge the numbers to create more hype and demand. Anyone who knows retail, knows that a lot of preorders and backorders are never fulfilled due to buyer backing out.

Using Amazon preorder sales as any kind of real metric is flawed and foolish. 


There's no doubt there will be a surge up front. Naturally, it's the newest thing from Canon in several years. It's 50MP monster. Between the curious, the bloggers, vloggers, websites, reviewers, mags and rags - that alone will sell the camera out in the beginning. But that is par for the course and true of anything. Then there are real pros and hard core enthusiasts who value the niche this thing satisfies for them. They will buy. 

Doesn't seem appealing to anyone else. Not for the money, or the features. 


It's a nearly $4,000 50MP 5D3 with worse ISO.

^ that's the nutshell of it.


For buyers, the 5DS has only one question and one question only - do you need/can you use 50MP? If yes, this is a camera for you. If no, it is a poor value. For most photography, all out resolution isn't the most important. It's always, always, always nice to have. But it isn't the most important. Especially if one is giving up other things in return.

The camera is only for those who plan to create the highest resolution photos with a DSLR, and who view all other capabilities as secondary or lesser than that. And even then, most will probably be from the Canon family already.

I'm thinking of this as neutrally as possible. Again, I'm a Canon user (5D3 and 6D). That is a lot of money for just high resolution. The killer is the weak ISO topping out at 6400. The FPS could be overlooked. No big deal there with so much data per photo. AF is perfectly fine. But the ISO is weak. 

Forget all these idiotic dynamic range trolls. I agree that more DR is better. But I also agree that it just isn't that important as it is made out to be. However, good clean high ISO is important. 

Sure, some are arguing, this is a STUDIO camera. You don't run even 6400 in a studio let alone more. I say - TRUE. But that again falls into my point that this is too specialized. Regardless of whether or not Canon released an incredibly good high ISO camera in the 5D4 - I think even a specialty camera should be a little more well rounded than that.


----------



## VirtualRain (Mar 24, 2015)

K said:


> For buyers, the 5DS has only one question and one question only - do you need/can you use 50MP? If yes, this is a camera for you. If no, it is a poor value. For most photography, all out resolution isn't the most important. It's always, always, always nice to have. But it isn't the most important. Especially if one is giving up other things in return.
> 
> The camera is only for those who plan to create the highest resolution photos with a DSLR, and who view all other capabilities as secondary or lesser than that. And even then, most will probably be from the Canon family already.
> 
> ...



I agree.

I think arguing about whether the 5DS is going to be successful is extremely challenging since (a) it's difficult to define success and (b) even more difficult to know if success is achieved.

There's no doubt that it cost Canon very little to bring this camera to market. They stuffed a larger 7D sensor in a 5D3 body... not much R&D involved in that. So who knows, maybe they'll have recovered their costs alone with just 1000 units (about $3.5M revenue).

I think it is worth debating who might buy this camera and whether it's good value for them or not. 

From what I gather, it's got medium format resolution with APS-C image quality. What kind of shooter wants/needs that? I would hazard to guess that anyone shooting high-fashion or making a living off of landscape photography has shifted to MF long ago. And I'm not sure how a 5DS is going to get a budding photographer noticed... the image quality just isn't there. And for those that say it provides massive cropping potential, well aren't those folks just as well off with the 7DII for half the money?


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 24, 2015)

K said:


> It's a nearly $4,000 50MP 5D3 with worse ISO.
> 
> ^ that's the nutshell of it.
> 
> ...



Piffle. I am a full time generalist, in the last year I have shot such varied events as symphony orchestra concerts (with no flash allowed), weddings, various sports, a lot of real estate, some scenic work and many portraits. I process everything in LR and have just over 62,000 images in my current working catalog, of that less than 200 images were shot above 800iso (and most of them were for tests). I used to use 100iso for everything unless absolutely pushed but LR Process Version 2012 was so much better for noise handling than PV2010 I use 200iso most of the time now.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 24, 2015)

K said:


> For buyers, the 5DS has only one question and one question only - do you need/can you use 50MP? If yes, this is a camera for you. If no, it is a poor value...
> 
> ...The camera is only for those who plan to create the highest resolution photos with a DSLR, and who view all other capabilities as secondary or lesser than that. And even then, most will probably be from the Canon family already...
> 
> ...That is a lot of money for just high resolution...



I generally agree with all of those statements. 

My disagreement was with the claim that this camera would be a failure or a poor seller. Some people are clearly buying this camera. It might not be you and I know it isn't me (the 5DIII is a far better match for what I do), but I simply disagree that it's possible to extrapolate the success or failure of the camera from our personal preferences. 

We also cannot know what kind of sales are needed for Canon to recover their costs and earn a profit. Since it shares many of the same physical features as the 5DIII, I assume there is some manufacturing cost savings to be had. Some people say it uses the same sensor as the 7DII. I'm not sure that's correct, as it doesn't have the DPAF of the 7D and they've restricted the high ISO, but it doesn't appear to be breaking any major new ground either, so there may be some savings there.

Unless I suddenly get a contract to start producing billboard-sized images, it's not a camera I imagine I will ever want or need. But, I think it's wrong to say that makes it a failure.


----------



## VirtualRain (Mar 24, 2015)

unfocused said:


> VirtualRain said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like some push-back on reply #76
> ...



Thanks for the push back! 

Looking at the test linked at the beginning of this thread, the year-old Sony sensor in the D810 is better to my eyes than the latest and greatest from Canon.... the 7DII and the 5DS R.

You may not like Sony, but they are smartest player out there right now. Almost every mobile device carry's a Sony Sensor these days... it's providing great profitability that will enable unprecedented R&D which will just put Canon further behind. 

I love Canon, but they seem like a dear in the headlights these days.


----------



## Sporgon (Mar 24, 2015)

Ladesir said:


> Im surprised what lack of knowledge some people has about DR and the meaning of exposure latitude
> and what it means to reproduce an image.
> 
> I would like to have the same exposure latitude in my Canon cameras as Nikon have now when we have 50Mp resolution.
> sorry to say but few here have a very narrow view of what DR and exposure latitude means in reality



Hey Mikael, was that aimed at me ? Seem to remember you told me I didn't know what a tonal curve was too. 
Behave yourself or I'll set Neuro on you.


----------



## zlatko (Mar 24, 2015)

VirtualRain said:


> K said:
> 
> 
> > For buyers, the 5DS has only one question and one question only - do you need/can you use 50MP? If yes, this is a camera for you. If no, it is a poor value. For most photography, all out resolution isn't the most important. It's always, always, always nice to have. But it isn't the most important. Especially if one is giving up other things in return.
> ...



About how much it costs to bring the 5D3 to market ... you have no idea. It's not that there's "no doubt that it cost Canon very little" but that you have no idea. 

And there's no point in debating whether this camera "is a good value" because that's entirely personal and subjective. That debate is going nowhere. 

As for APS-C image quality ... have you seen the 5DS's image quality? It's fantastic. Fantastic. It's not APS-C image quality. You say "the image quality just isn't there". My goodness, that just couldn't be more wrong. No facts there, just more opinion-based rain on the parade. If someone can't get high quality images with the 5DS, then they can't get high quality images with anything ever. Photographers all over the world have produced amazing work with past Canon cameras, but you say "the image quality just isn't there". Oh ... my ... goodness. I'm speechless (almost).

As for Canon failing to make a camera that gets a budding photographers "noticed" ... NEWS FLASH: buying a camera (any camera) isn't what gets a budding photographer noticed.

To the person above who feels ISO 6400 makes this camera "too specialized" ... Jeepers, almost ALL of the photography ever done and almost all of the photography done today is still done in the ISO 100 - 6400 range. And ISO 6400 on this camera looks pretty darned good. So ISO 6400 is hardly making this a "specialty camera".

As for pushback on post #76 about Canon having "run out of innovation". Goodness, that's easy. Off the top of my head:
Highest MP DSLR (currently)
World's only 14fps DSLR
World's only 8-15 fisheye zoom
World's only 17T-SE
World's best 24-70/2.8 AF zoom
World's smallest DSLR
Low light autofocus sensitivity down to EV -3 (6D)
Two autofocus pancake lenses
World's only 11-24 zoom
World's only line of wide-angle primes with IS (24, 28, 35)
f/1.2 lenses
Dual pixel AF for video
World's only camera maker with dedicated radio transmitter & flash
Anti flicker feature for shooting in fluorescent light
1X - 5X macro lens
Options for medium and small RAW files
Macro twin light flash
User replaceable focusing screens on many models
Arguably the best ergonomics of any AF camera system


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 24, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Ladesir said:
> 
> 
> > Im surprised what lack of knowledge some people has about DR and the meaning of exposure latitude
> ...



Lol. Besides, we all know that DR and exposure latitude mean. DR means you can shoot pictures of black barbecues next to white sheds. Exposure latitude means you can underexpose pictures of awnings by five stops then push them in post. The *relevance* is still woefully unclear, but Mikael lacked that from the outset.


----------



## unfocused (Mar 25, 2015)

zlatko said:


> As for pushback on post #76 about Canon having "run out of innovation". Goodness, that's easy. Off the top of my head:
> Highest MP DSLR (currently)
> World's only 14fps DSLR
> World's only 8-15 fisheye zoom
> ...



Very good list.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Mar 25, 2015)

unfocused said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > As for pushback on post #76 about Canon having "run out of innovation". Goodness, that's easy. Off the top of my head:
> ...



Indeed. Canon continues to innovate, so the list is dynamic...and it already has a very good range.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Mar 25, 2015)

Didn't they use the first CMOS structure sensor in a DSLR?


----------



## zlatko (Mar 25, 2015)

A few more nice things from Canon:
World's only 200-400 zoom with built-in 1.4X extender
World's only 24-70/4 zoom with built-in 0.7X macro function
600/4 lens that is 2.5 lbs. lighter than Nikon's 600/4
500/4 lens that is 1.5 lbs. lighter than Nikon's 500/4
300/2.8 lens that is 1.2 lbs. lighter than Nikon's 300/2.8
DO lenses, including 400/4 (Nikon doesn't make a 400/4)


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 25, 2015)

zlatko said:


> A few more nice things from Canon:
> World's only 200-400 zoom with built-in 1.4X extender
> World's only 24-70/4 zoom with built-in 0.7X macro function
> 600/4 lens that is 2.5 lbs. lighter than Nikon's 600/4
> ...



The Canon 24mm tilt and shift lens has 'free rotation', the Nikon version doesn't, the IQ from the Nikon sucks too. The 70-200 f2.8IS MkII doesn't become a 130mm at longest focal length at MFD, the Nikon Blue Ribbon 70-200 f2.8 VR MkII does ;D

Nikon do have a few points over their competition though, Canon don't offer a hipster FF camera and they were not banned from selling any of their cameras in China due to QC issues.


----------



## VirtualRain (Mar 25, 2015)

zlatko said:


> About how much it costs to bring the 5D3 to market ... you have no idea. It's not that there's "no doubt that it cost Canon very little" but that you have no idea.
> 
> And there's no point in debating whether this camera "is a good value" because that's entirely personal and subjective. That debate is going nowhere.
> 
> ...



That's good pushback! 

And a good list... Canon does have some great products... but besides the dual-pixel technology, I wouldn't consider many of those innovative. There were wireless flash trigger systems before Canon's and there has been fast lenses and zooms and focusing screens before... none of that is innovation. Many of these may be differentiators, but not innovations. And while the 5DS may have the highest resolution of 35mm equivalent FF DSLRs, aren't there medium format DSLRs with higher res?

The early images I've seen from the 5DS have not impressed me. And in the review related to this thread, they are certainly not impressive... are they? Are people happy with what was posted in that review? 

There's no doubt that great images will come from this camera... people take great photos on an iPhone these days. It's just not bringing anything new to the table. 50Mpx at $4K may be something new, but that image quality at 50Mpx is not new... It's more of the same.

I guess I still struggle to understand who's buying this (besides well-heeled enthusiasts here)... I would have to think that people making good money selling high resolution images have MF and aren't going to abandon them for this camera. And I just can't see someone breaking into MF work with this camera. So who does that leave? The struggling or budding photographer that want's higher quality poster prints for their gallery on main-street? I really don't know.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 25, 2015)

VirtualRain said:


> here's no doubt that great images will come from this camera... people take great photos on an iPhone these days. It's just not bringing anything new to the table. 50Mpx at $4K may be something new, but that image quality at 50Mpx is not new... It's more of the same.



It always makes me chuckle a bit when people discount the major feature of a new gadget in order to claim that it's pointless. 

Out of curiosity, if Nikon put out a d900 tomorrow with a Sony 50MP sensor that performs identically to the d800 in all metrics other than spatial resolution if you would suggest it's more of the same?



VirtualRain said:


> I guess I still struggle to understand who's buying this



Easy: people who want higher than 22mpx in an EF compatible DSLR.


----------



## ritholtz (Mar 25, 2015)

Ladesir said:


> Im surprised what lack of knowledge some people has about DR and the meaning of exposure latitude
> and what it means to reproduce an image.
> 
> I would like to have the same exposure latitude in my Canon cameras as Nikon have now when we have 50Mp resolution.
> sorry to say but few here have a very narrow view of what DR and exposure latitude means in reality


One can do +3EV push with Canon and get results like exmor sensor. 
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr144_0=canon_eos70d&attr144_1=nikon_d5500&attr144_2=canon_eos70d&attr144_3=nikon_d5500&attr146_0=100_0&attr146_1=100_0&attr146_2=100_3&attr146_3=100_3&normalization=full&widget=205&x=1.000462748727441&y=1.1182943603851445


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Mar 25, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Ladesir said:
> 
> 
> > Im surprised what lack of knowledge some people has about DR and the meaning of exposure latitude
> ...



You do realize that you misleading put up the wrong plot choice, you put up Screen instead of Print (normalized) because you know it makes the 6D appear to do better past ISO400.

Of course you'll go and use Print when you compare the 5Ds no doubt. Whatever makes Nikon look worse, of course, pick and chose. (not that it will look worse in this case but the 5Ds won't look as much worse as if you stuck to the Screen plot again (not that you should))

ahh i got sucked in to the hypocritical nonsense and trickery again and posted, but i figure i may as well at least point this out in case others accidentally miss it


----------



## rozinyak (Mar 25, 2015)

K said:


> I understand the idea Canon is going with is to create specialty cameras. But if this thing is only good at ISO 100 and 200 under studio conditions, that's probably too specialized to be successful. The market for this camera is too small.



I am trying to get my head round this model. I am not a pro but I am trying to specialize in landscape only. I love photography in general but I keep finding myself not using any full-format camera for anything else than landscape, and even beyond that I mostly love coast photography with long exposures. I don't have a lot of need for an allrounder. I have recently sold my 5D Mark II and I believe "anything" will be better than that but I am definitely thinking the Canon-line although I have full respect for other brands. So what I am looking at is the 5D Mark III (which might soon become obsolete as it has been with us for a while now, especially with rumours regarding the Mark IV becoming more frequent), the Mark IV (with specs yet to be seen) or the 5Ds R. I have also just "upgraded" (meaning quality-wise) from the old 16-35mm f/2.8L II to the much newer 16-35mm f/4L IS. Also considering the new 11-24L despite it being f/4 and without a sensible filter-mounting possibility.

There really is too much focus on printing though when it comes to the 5Ds/R. Let's stick with the "R" as I am the landscape type.

For me prints would be secondary although I have also considered to find my own way to arrange my own exhibition, for which print is an essential thing to consider. When it comes to digital though, 4K is right round the corner, and I have already seen 10K videos. So, when speaking of the amount of detail, sharpness and pixels, I am speaking of viewing on future screens as well. Eventually the current size of 5D Mark III (or IV even?) might be too small and I don't want to find myself looking at old photos in the future that could have been much larger. I am not a pixel-geek though. This is a huge dilemma for me.

The level of detail in the 5Ds R is just stunning, something that I would dearly appreciate in my landscape photos, be it print or digital. At the same time I am not so happy about the noize-level, even if I could make do with the ISO range. What I normally do is set up my camera on a tripod, set my intervalometer to somewhere between 2sec-minutes, f/8-f/22, ISO between 100-800 (I don't really take night-sky photos), and that's pretty much it.

What I'd then be looking at is richness of colour, potentially wondering about any noize-issues for long exposures, level of detail and sharpness. I guess I would still fit into the target group of the 5Ds R but it is very early to tell how I'd be better off (all speaking of long exposures and the above settings):

- 5D Mark III with 11-24L
- 5Ds R with 11-24L
- 5Ds R without the 11-24L but with 16-35 f/4L IS
- 5D Mark IV (if not too video-specific but more like an allrounder like the Mark III)

Either way I have a hunch it will be an edgy decision to make.


----------



## memoriaphoto (Mar 25, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> raised shadows are raised shadows, they do not have the colour and tonality of correctly exposed mid tones.



AMEN to that...


----------



## bgoyette (Mar 25, 2015)

VirtualRain said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > But I think anyone that really needs 50MP, already has a medium format camera like the 645Z. Do you think all the MF guys are suddenly going to dump their systems and buy a 5DS? No... Not with the results this camera is producing... No way.
> ...


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 25, 2015)

Whoa! Hang on, I never said that stuff. Someone else did. You somehow managed to attribute that quote to my name. And given what was said, I'd prefer it not to be ;D




bgoyette said:


> VirtualRain said:
> 
> 
> > PureClassA said:
> ...


----------



## unfocused (Mar 25, 2015)

I believe it should have gone like this:



bgoyette said:


> VirtualRain said:
> 
> 
> > But I think anyone that really needs 50MP, already has a medium format camera like the 645Z. Do you think all the MF guys are suddenly going to dump their systems and buy a 5DS? No... Not with the results this camera is producing... No way.
> ...


----------



## bgoyette (Mar 25, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Whoa! Hang on, I never said that stuff. Someone else did. You somehow managed to attribute that quote to my name. And given what was said, I'd prefer it not to be ;D



whoops...sorry...I have no idea what happened there... (I quoted out of the original post, not yours)...anyway I was responding to the post not the poster (something I wish would happen more around here) 

Barry


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 25, 2015)

RobertG. said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > tomscott said:
> ...


I spoke to David Noton yesterday whilst at The Photography Show about the 5DS away from the Canon stand and in normal conversation (we know each other) and he felt for landscape photographers its the best DSLR he has ever used and it was said sincerely.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 25, 2015)

I think it may wind up being the best portrait camera ever too. Sony will release a 50MP sensor.... but no word I don't believe whether they will license it to Nikon or not as they did the 36MP chip. If Sony really wants to own a piece of the market, I'd think they would hold onto it and force folks to buy Sony over Nikon. I think that's more likely now than 2-3 years ago when Sony had jack squat for lens options. They are really pushing them out now.

That said, the market desirability for Canon glass is obviously far, far greater. Sony withholding the chip from Nikon would be a huge advantage for Canon.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 25, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> I think it may wind up being the best portrait camera ever too. Sony will release a 50MP sensor.... but no word I don't believe whether they will license it to Nikon or not as they did the 36MP chip. If Sony really wants to own a piece of the market, I'd think they would hold onto it and force folks to buy Sony over Nikon. I think that's more likely now than 2-3 years ago when Sony had jack squat for lens options. They are really pushing them out now.
> 
> That said, the market desirability for Canon glass is obviously far, far greater. Sony withholding the chip from Nikon would be a huge advantage for Canon.


I see your point but it will be a hard one for Sony. Nikon is a good customer and they will not want them to consider other players like CMOSIS who design & TowerJazz who fab the sensors for Leica. OnSemi, Omnivision etc would love to enter that space compared to their other markets its small but it helps other development and prestige.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 25, 2015)

The 5DS cameras at The Photography Show were all pre-production models I didnt see any 5DS R cameras there.


----------



## Stu_bert (Mar 25, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> I think it may wind up being the best portrait camera ever too. Sony will release a 50MP sensor.... but no word I don't believe whether they will license it to Nikon or not as they did the 36MP chip. If Sony really wants to own a piece of the market, I'd think they would hold onto it and force folks to buy Sony over Nikon. I think that's more likely now than 2-3 years ago when Sony had jack squat for lens options. They are really pushing them out now.
> 
> That said, the market desirability for Canon glass is obviously far, far greater. Sony withholding the chip from Nikon would be a huge advantage for Canon.



Nikon are getting access to the sensor... or so the rumors say....


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 25, 2015)

Sony is sooner than later going to reach a point when Nikon will start to hurt them by licensing their sensors. That point will be marked with a leading indicator of Sony lens line-up maturity....and it's rapidly approaching. Again, I'm predicating this entirely on the notion that Sony has a serious interest in being a major market share of the camera world (particularly pro). If they don't, they will continue selling to Nikon ... or don't be too surprised if they one day make a buy-out offer. (This is the financial planner/economics major speaking)


----------



## Stu_bert (Mar 25, 2015)

Yup, and unless Nikon are asleep they are not solely reliant on the day that Sony chooses to do that. I would not be surprised if the agreement from Nikon covered any Sony sensor produced over n years, based on a roadmap discussed x years ago and perhaps renewed since then.

Nikon would be really silly if they don't review their options quiet regularly, especially as Sony are not the only game in town.

I don't think Sony will acquire Nikon, unless Nikon hold some useful patents that they did not get when they bought Minolta. 

But I think Sony want to become whatever will make them the most money, and I would guess they are making more from smartphone sensors and the like than cameras. They also are moving into sensors in vehicles...

I would guess they make more from the sales to Nikon than they do from their own. Until that changes significantly, I don't see why Sony will change that relationship - again, unless they are really silly they can see the position that Nikon hold in the market and they know that Nikon can source elsewhere, and Canon aren't collapsing just because Sony can produce sensors with better DR....


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 25, 2015)

Sony holds the cards. Not Nikon. You need only look at who has the enormously bigger market capitalization to see it. If Sony did buy Nikon, they would be foolhardy to do away with the brand. It would merely become a subsidiary of Sony. If I was Sony, I'd likely be looking into this were my intentions in the camera world sincere. Nikon has a far better and more recognizable distribution chain in the camera world than does Sony, but Sony has the tech. Without Sony today, Nikon is a 2nd rate camera behind Canon. That fact is undeniable by their abandonment of multiple failed pro camera, Canon competitor attempts on their own.


----------



## Stu_bert (Mar 25, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Sony holds the cards. Not Nikon. You need only look at who has the enormously bigger market capitalization to see it. If Sony did buy Nikon, they would be foolhardy to do away with the brand. It would merely become a subsidiary of Sony. If I was Sony, I'd likely be looking into this were my intentions in the camera world sincere. Nikon has a far better and more recognizable distribution chain in the camera world than does Sony, but Sony has the tech. Without Sony today, Nikon is a 2nd rate camera behind Canon. That fact is undeniable by their abandonment of multiple failed pro camera, Canon competitor attempts on their own.



Not sure I agree. Nikon design better cameras from a photographers' perspective. They have more experience in terms of support and indeed distribution. They have better lens and a better relationship with Pros and the like. Completely agree on the brand.

But the camera market is shrinking. Hence why Sony is diversifying into the bigger, less saturated markets. Assuming Nikon were up for the acquisition, the only thing that Sony offer Nikon is the sensor. And Nikon can get that from other manufacturers. So I am not sure I agree Sony holds all the cards. And I'm also not sure that the current price that Nikon would cost them vs the improvement to the bottom line is worth it for Sony.

Finally, what's wrong with #2 in the market? Even with Sony, Nikon are still #2....


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 26, 2015)

Sony has the money. And I didn't say Nikon would be #2, I said they would be a 2nd rate camera behind Canon. And without Sony they absolutely would. They were a 2nd rate camera before they partnered with Sony. Now technologically the competition is more even handed. I wasn't referring to sales per se. Canon still kicks their behinds up and down Main Street in that department either way. Nikon gave up because they realized they couldn't produce a system that could compete effectively with Canon. This is me just citing pure statistical data and historical market share. They brought in Sony to give themselves a chance.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Mar 26, 2015)

Stu_bert said:


> Yup, and unless Nikon are asleep they are not solely reliant on the day that Sony chooses to do that.



They use Toshiba in the D7100.


----------



## Stu_bert (Mar 26, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Sony has the money. And I didn't say Nikon would be #2, I said they would be a 2nd rate camera behind Canon. And without Sony they absolutely would. They were a 2nd rate camera before they partnered with Sony. Now technologically the competition is more even handed. I wasn't referring to sales per se. Canon still kicks their behinds up and down Main Street in that department either way. Nikon gave up because they realized they couldn't produce a system that could compete effectively with Canon. This is me just citing pure statistical data and historical market share. They brought in Sony to give themselves a chance.



Sorry, you did indeed say 2nd rate - my bad. However, somewhat harsh to call them 2nd rate. And Sony may have the money, does not mean that buying Nikon is the best return on that investment. Agree Nikon decided it was more cost-effective for them to use Sony than continue with their own efforts. And that in itself may give a good insight into the challenge Canon face and why they're not about to make changes to all their fab facilities...


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 26, 2015)

Stu_bert said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > Sony has the money. And I didn't say Nikon would be #2, I said they would be a 2nd rate camera behind Canon. And without Sony they absolutely would. They were a 2nd rate camera before they partnered with Sony. Now technologically the competition is more even handed. I wasn't referring to sales per se. Canon still kicks their behinds up and down Main Street in that department either way. Nikon gave up because they realized they couldn't produce a system that could compete effectively with Canon. This is me just citing pure statistical data and historical market share. They brought in Sony to give themselves a chance.
> ...



2nd rate because the market said so. Canon and Nikon both have relatively equal distribution capabilities, but the market was clearly choosing Canon models over Nikon models in the upper end before Nikon partnered with Sony. Once the Sony sensors became the staple of the Nikon upper end models, there was far more competitive choices between the two. I don't want what I said to be misconstrued as "Nikon made/makes bad cameras" They don't. But given the options before the Sony sensors, it was plainly obvious which was the preferred professional line, specifically the 800 series Nikons vs. the 5 series Canons. The 1DX still makes Canon king, because Nikon hasn't made anything compelling enough to really challenge it. There is still something like a ridiculous 7 to 1 ratio of Pro Canon systems on sidelines and in journalism vs Nikon's D3 & D4 offerings, and certainly a lot of that also has to do with the glass. For example, Nikon can't (or just hasn't) produced a 70-200mm pro grade lens that can equal or surpass Canon's. Even all the testing data from the greatly debated DxO shows as much. That's a bread and butter focal length lens.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Mar 27, 2015)

Sony makes far more money from its sensor division than it makes from selling DSLRs. They know if they hold tech back from customers for their own use eventually they will find other partners and their is more to the cameras than simply the sensor. 
Sony make sensors for Ricoh Pentax, Hasselblad, Phase One, Canon (1"), Olympus as well as Nikon. The J1 Nikon used a sensor made by Aptina and OnSemi in particular have the ability to make sensors to compete with Sony for DSLRs so I dont see Sony holding tech back from Nikon at all.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 27, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> Sony makes far more money from its sensor division than it makes from selling DSLRs. They know if they hold tech back from customers for their own use eventually they will find other partners and their is more to the cameras than simply the sensor.
> Sony make sensors for Ricoh Pentax, Hasselblad, Phase One, Canon (1"), Olympus as well as Nikon. The J1 Nikon used a sensor made by Aptina and OnSemi in particular have the ability to make sensors to compete with Sony for DSLRs so I dont see Sony holding tech back from Nikon at all.



You're right. But that's why I also said that IF Sony wants to be a big boy in this market they will have to reach a level of product line maturity before they could pull the plug (selectively) from others. They make more money selling a body of their own than simply a sensor to Nikon. (MF doesn't count, because Sony isn't in that market). I'm not saying they will do it, but I won't be surprised and neither should Nikon. Once their lens line-up reaches a mature offering (and they are running full speed at it) they will be in a position to take a lot more sale away from a big player like Nikon, provided they also produce the cameras pros want. If Sony is content to stick with mirrorless, it won't happen. But if they start creating a serious line of DSLRs with great AF, ergonomics, and menus.... why would they continue to sell their competitive advantage (sensors) to Nikon? Again, just hypothesis, but it makes good business sense IF they want their cameras to be dominant players. Otherwise, people will prefer to get the Sony sensor performance in much more capable Nikon DSLR bodies, while Sony remains more a parts manufacturer than a camera maker.


----------



## Stu_bert (Mar 27, 2015)

Still not sure I completely agree with you. The same sensor is in the Nikon 8xx vs the Sony A7r, yet the results from the Nikon are generally considered superior based on what Nikon do with the sensor data, and the AF in the Nikon 4s is nigh on the same as the 1Dx (bearing in mind the latter took a few ideas from the D3/s when they overhauled the AF from the III/IV series). And Pro's moved from Canon to Nikon in significant numbers during the III focusing debacle - sure the sensor played a big part in that also. 

I would suspect Nikon & Canon make more from their glass then they do their bodies, margin wise, but Sony as you say are not there yet, and do a lot in partnership with Zeiss I thought. Kind of like Nikon do with Sony on the sensor.

I think Sony have a longer term view which is the camera market is shrinking full stop. Their presence in it makes a profit but is also a huge marketing opportunity in terms of selling sensors in other markets, be that smartphones, automobiles and security. The camera market is important, but I dont think long-term will offer much revenue.

Sony coming later to the "party" and having a broader set of markets to address meant they did not have the legacy which Canon had with their fabs from the start of the 21st century. And since Canon has not been that interested in being an OEM, never got into these other markets which would have helped fund new fabs. In that respect, well done Sony for the foresight. Samsung is in an even better position based on how broad it's markets are developing CPUs, memory, storage etc - and look at their 28MP APS-C sensor as a good example - probably ahead of Canon and comparable to Sony. 

But again, I think Samsung and Sony will continue in the camera market for the prestige and the leverage they get from being well recognised in the quality end of sensor development, and the opportunities that offers them in bigger markets. If the numbers stack up might either of them buy Nikon? Sure. Could Nikon survive in the same #2 slot if Sony with-held their sensors. I believe so also.


----------



## jrista (Mar 28, 2015)

Stu_bert said:


> Still not sure I completely agree with you. The same sensor is in the Nikon 8xx vs the Sony A7r, yet the results from the Nikon are generally considered superior based on what Nikon do with the sensor data, and the AF in the Nikon 4s is nigh on the same as the 1Dx (bearing in mind the latter took a few ideas from the D3/s when they overhauled the AF from the III/IV series). And Pro's moved from Canon to Nikon in significant numbers during the III focusing debacle - sure the sensor played a big part in that also.
> 
> I would suspect Nikon & Canon make more from their glass then they do their bodies, margin wise, but Sony as you say are not there yet, and do a lot in partnership with Zeiss I thought. Kind of like Nikon do with Sony on the sensor.
> 
> ...




+1 I think you nailed it.


I agree, I don't think Nikon would fail if Sony pulled their sensors, but, as you say, it seems illogical for them to do so, as that's really their market: sensors. I also believe your dead on about lens sales. Especially with lenses being upgraded...that gives established users in addition to new users reason to spend more money on newer, sharper lenses. 


Both Sony and Samsung have some very intriguing parts at extremely attractive prices. I've been encouraging friends who like photography to buy better cameras. I've been taking them to local camera stores, putting the latest entry-level Canon & Nikon DSLRs and the Sony A6000 in front of them and telling them only: "Pick up each one, see how it feels in your hands, how it fits, how it works. Ergonomics is one of the most important things about a camera." 


So far, everyone has chosen the Sony A6000, usually after proclamations about how heavy the Canon Rebels are, how large and bulky both the Rebel and Nikon Dxxxx series are, and how much they like the small, light weight lenses and features of the Sony. The only push I've given any of them is simply to put the A6000 down there instead of some other Sony camera. ;P The features packed into that thing are incredible, and it's difficult to get anyone interested in a more expensive Canon or Nikon when they have this tiny, light weight camera with tiny, ultra light weight lenses in their hands. Outside of that, the rest is up to them. I think Sony NAILED it with the A6000.


I am looking forward to renting the Samsung NX1 from LensRentals soon here to actually give it a try. I was going to adapt it to my 600mm lens, but now I want to actually give some Samsung lenses a try as well. Having used the A6000 now, though, and seeing how small and light the lenses are (amazingly so...you could put a couple in your pocket and forget they were there), I think the NX1 will have a lot of competition for anyone except those looking for a well-priced wildlife and birding mirrorless (especially once the Samsung 300mm f/2.8 lens hits.) Both cameras seem exceptional on the features and capabilities front, with 11fps and 15fps, topping (by far) anything else in their price ranges. The only thing I haven't yet been impressed with are the EVFs...but, I haven't used Samsung's yet, and it sounds pretty good.


----------



## PureClassA (Mar 28, 2015)

jrista said:


> Stu_bert said:
> 
> 
> > Still not sure I completely agree with you. The same sensor is in the Nikon 8xx vs the Sony A7r, yet the results from the Nikon are generally considered superior based on what Nikon do with the sensor data, and the AF in the Nikon 4s is nigh on the same as the 1Dx (bearing in mind the latter took a few ideas from the D3/s when they overhauled the AF from the III/IV series). And Pro's moved from Canon to Nikon in significant numbers during the III focusing debacle - sure the sensor played a big part in that also.
> ...



Yes. My entire hypothesis is entirely predicated on just how aggressive a player in the pro camera market Sony wants to be.


----------



## Stu_bert (Mar 28, 2015)

jrista said:


> Stu_bert said:
> 
> 
> > Still not sure I completely agree with you. The same sensor is in the Nikon 8xx vs the Sony A7r, yet the results from the Nikon are generally considered superior based on what Nikon do with the sensor data, and the AF in the Nikon 4s is nigh on the same as the 1Dx (bearing in mind the latter took a few ideas from the D3/s when they overhauled the AF from the III/IV series). And Pro's moved from Canon to Nikon in significant numbers during the III focusing debacle - sure the sensor played a big part in that also.
> ...



I think anyone who has no investment in cameras Jon has great opportunities today, and frankly as has been said a number of times, if you cant make a good picture with any brand today then the problem is alas with you and not the equipment - I'm not trying to re-ignite previous discussions on DR, lol. I remember seeing a bunch of BIFs from a photographer using a 20D and the 100-400mm. For him he did not need 90% hit rate he just needed 1. And if I was starting out from scratch with only a little knowledge about cameras, would I want something big and heavy (relatively)? Probably not.

I think many people here are looking an options, I think the challenge is sharing that information with others in a way which doesn't get people defending their previous investment. I've no hands on experience of the NX1 or the A6000 but would be interested in your findings, especially on the AF - spookily enough a friend at work has ditched the A6000 because of the AF (coming from a Pentax K dslr), another ditched the 5D III and went Fuji XT based on weight, and a 3rd has all but stop using his Nikon for Fuji XT also for weight.

It'll also be interesting to see what's coming next in terms of taking pictures - I think smartphones are starting to level out (Google glass or the equivalent ? ) - personally I only use the smartphone as a mobile computer which is internet connected. Occasionally I use it to capture a location, but the whole mode of operation - looking at a screen with your arms outstretched - fine for a tripod, but not for everything else. So I'll replace the Iphone 4 when it finally dies, but less and less the need to replace it is compelling. They're (smartphones) almost ubiquitous and for me the features they offer are levelling out. I've seen Apple have some patents recently all focused on improving the camera features - because other than refinements on OS, battery life, screen quality and speed (games), what else is there? But even then, I think that smartphones have cornered those who want to capture a moment in their lives, as opposed to want to make a picture - and I dont mean that offensively.


Same with tablet. They (Apple, Samsung etc) face the same challenges as Canon, Nikon etc convincing people to change to the latest model when the step-changes are not there. I think that's why Sony is looking at sensors in cars and the like, as there's a equally large market there, and of course security devices which Canon has just bought into. All signs that for the sort of equipment that people here buy & use, that market is shrinking rapidly. I agree a lot with Tom Hogan when he identifies shortcomings in workflow / integration, I just dont think Canon & Nikon have the capability in SW dev - not really their forte. They're gonna stick to their bread n butter. Fortunately, there aren't a huge amount of lenses left that Canon need to replace for my needs, and as you say the ability to put them onto other bodies is appealing. I think the only remaining challenge on lenses is how to make them "built like a tank", but really light. DO is interesting, but not quite the step-change required. (As an aside, I'm always puzzled as to why Nikon has not followed Canon into the film industry. My only guess would be cash-flow, and the investment required is significant... )

Guess we'll get to spend more time using our equipment as the opportunity to entice us to change or upgrade to something will reduce.

Let us all know how you fare with the NX1, I think objective and quantitative information when presented in a non-inciting manner is always welcome here.


----------



## Trevster (Mar 28, 2015)

I put in an order for the 5DS R, and one of the things that I plan to do is use it hand-held at 1600 iso to take photos of paintings in museums (so I can zoom in on detail, like how an eye was painted, etc). I'm also a painter.

Is it unreasonable to think that I could get photos as sharp as I do with a hand held 7D with a 24-70mm f/2.8L II lens? Or does the increased mp also demand a tripod (which is something that can't be used, at say, the MET). Reading about the new mirror vibration control system is making me think that maybe it will be very hard to use this hand held indoors. 

Would a slight shake be magnified as mp increase?

- Trevor


----------



## lintoni (Mar 28, 2015)

Trevster said:


> I put in an order for the 5DS R, and one of the things that I plan to do is use it hand-held at 1600 iso to take photos of paintings in museums (so I can zoom in on detail, like how an eye was painted, etc). I'm also a painter.
> 
> Is it unreasonable to think that I could get photos as sharp as I do with a hand held 7D with a 24-70mm f/2.8L II lens? Or does the increased mp also demand a tripod (which is something that can't be used, at say, the MET). Reading about the new mirror vibration control system is making me think that maybe it will be very hard to use this hand held indoors.
> 
> ...


There's a discussion on this elsewhere on CR that you may be interested in - 

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=25707.0


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 28, 2015)

Trevster said:


> I put in an order for the 5DS R, and one of the things that I plan to do is use it hand-held at 1600 iso to take photos of paintings in museums (so I can zoom in on detail, like how an eye was painted, etc). I'm also a painter.
> 
> Is it unreasonable to think that I could get photos as sharp as I do with a hand held 7D with a 24-70mm f/2.8L II lens? Or does the increased mp also demand a tripod (which is something that can't be used, at say, the MET). Reading about the new mirror vibration control system is making me think that maybe it will be very hard to use this hand held indoors.
> 
> ...



If you had a doppelganger and you both stood next to each other, you with the 5DSR and your twin a 7D MkII and you both take the same framed shot from the same distance and use equivalence to normalise focal length, shutter speed, dof and noise, the resultant images, when viewed the same size will have the same amount of blur.

If you view them at 100% the FF camera will appear to have more blur but that is simply because you are making the picture bigger.

So, for example: 

5DSR and 100mm L IS macro, f5.6, iso 400, and 1/60 sec,
7D MkII and 60mm EF-S macro, f4, iso 200, and 1/60 sec,

Both images will have practically identical image characteristics (noise, dof, movement blur, etc) when viewed at the same image size (not percent).


----------



## Trevster (Mar 28, 2015)

lintoni said:


> Trevster said:
> 
> 
> > I put in an order for the 5DS R, and one of the things that I plan to do is use it hand-held at 1600 iso to take photos of paintings in museums (so I can zoom in on detail, like how an eye was painted, etc). I'm also a painter.
> ...



Many thanks!


----------



## jrista (Mar 29, 2015)

Stu_bert said:


> I think anyone who has no investment in cameras Jon has great opportunities today, and frankly as has been said a number of times, if you cant make a good picture with any brand today then the problem is alas with you and not the equipment - I'm not trying to re-ignite previous discussions on DR, lol. I remember seeing a bunch of BIFs from a photographer using a 20D and the 100-400mm. For him he did not need 90% hit rate he just needed 1. And if I was starting out from scratch with only a little knowledge about cameras, would I want something big and heavy (relatively)? Probably not.




I dunno. I used to think the same way, but I've come to the conclusion that diversity is great. I want an A6000 myself, if for some reason the NX1 doesn't pan out. I may get one even IF the NX1 pans out, as it's just so small, light, and...cost effective! I was pretty hard-core Canon in the past, but I like not limiting myself in my equipment choices. 




Stu_bert said:


> I think many people here are looking an options, I think the challenge is sharing that information with others in a way which doesn't get people defending their previous investment. I've no hands on experience of the NX1 or the A6000 but would be interested in your findings, especially on the AF - spookily enough a friend at work has ditched the A6000 because of the AF (coming from a Pentax K dslr), another ditched the 5D III and went Fuji XT based on weight, and a 3rd has all but stop using his Nikon for Fuji XT also for weight.





Regarding AF performance, just as with any camera brand AF performance is often dependent on the lenses. Not every lens is equal in that respect...the same is true of Sony. Some lenses are better than others. I was experimenting with their 60mm macro last...that thing is tiny, ultra light, and snaps to focus in a heartbeat. The AF system is pretty sweet on the A6000, but it is a little complicated...about as complicated as a 5D III or 7D II. Takes some time to learn how to use it effectively.


I think if you give yourself time to get used to a system, you can use any system effectively. Sony's system isn't without it's flaws...for sure. However, neither is Canon's. Having used the 5D III for a year now, while it's better in most respects than my 7D, both the 5D III and the 600mm lens have their quirky, fidgity moments that cost me shots. One of the things that drives me nuts about it is the way it hunts for focus...it always hunts in towards the photographer first, then out away. When your trying to lock onto a bird in flight after photographing another bird on the ground or on a tree in the foreground, that usually costs you the shot. Being at f/4, the hunt is slower as well, and even when it should lock onto the bird when it finally gets there, sometimes it just misses. I try to manually snap focus to infinity whenever I switch target types like that, but it doesn't always help. 


Every AF system has it's flaws, just as every AF system has it's strengths. You just learn to work within the limitations. I love most of the things my Canon AF system does, despite the hunting issue.





Stu_bert said:


> It'll also be interesting to see what's coming next in terms of taking pictures - I think smartphones are starting to level out (Google glass or the equivalent ?  ) - personally I only use the smartphone as a mobile computer which is internet connected. Occasionally I use it to capture a location, but the whole mode of operation - looking at a screen with your arms outstretched - fine for a tripod, but not for everything else. So I'll replace the Iphone 4 when it finally dies, but less and less the need to replace it is compelling. They're (smartphones) almost ubiquitous and for me the features they offer are levelling out. I've seen Apple have some patents recently all focused on improving the camera features - because other than refinements on OS, battery life, screen quality and speed (games), what else is there? But even then, I think that smartphones have cornered those who want to capture a moment in their lives, as opposed to want to make a picture - and I dont mean that offensively.





As my 450D was my first camera, I never had a P&S before that, and the only other cameras I'd used prior to that were film cameras, I've never enjoyed images from camera phones. Even the great Lumia 1020 camera, which has a GREAT sensor, just lacks any kind of focus control, no thin depth of field, nothing that lends itself to creativity. There are some third-party lens addons that you can get for iPhones...they bring some additional capabilities, but...it's still a camera phone. 


I don't really even use my smartphone for snapshots. That's one of the reasons I want something like the A6000 and NX1...I want a CAMERA, something I can still take great photos with, but which is very light and will fit in a pocket. The NX1 may double as that, but I get the feeling it will be a little too big. Plus, the Sony lenses are incredibly light...I love em. 


I'd love to see something like that from Canon. A LOT of the time these days, I wish I had a decent camera with me when I see something amazing, but don't have my $25,000+ Canon DSLR kit with me. I just can't lug that much value around with me all the time. Something smaller that I can always keep on me is becoming significantly more appealing. I can't count how many times in the last 4 months on my drive home that I've seen some amazing shot...and didn't have my gear with me. I always race home, grab my gear, and head back out...but a moment is a moment, it's gone in seconds. You might be able to find another, but it's rare. 


Canon has nothing to compete in this space. The EOS M...well, while I know a lot of people are frustrated with Canon North America for not bringing the EOS M 3 to the states, I actually think they are right. Canon just doesn't have anything that compete in this space at the moment. If two friends go to the local camera store, and one puts an EOS M and the A6000 on the table, then starts talking about their capabilities...it's just no contest. If your average customer goes in and asks the guy behind the counter what they could get for less than a grand that would give them the best photos...it's a tossup whether they even bring an EOS M out, assuming they have any in stock. I don't think Canon, Nikon, not really even Olympus or Pentax have anything at a $550 price point that competes with something like the A6000. Neither the bodies & firmware nor the lenses compete well enough.


Three times now, I've taken friends who have told me they want a DSLR to the local camera store, pulled out a Canon, Nikon, and the A6000. The only thing I tell them is that ergonomics are a critical factor, so pick the camera that feels best. The Canon is out in a heartbeat because of it's weight (the Rebels are actually pretty heavy, surprised me; none of the stores seem to have the SL1, which might be a better contender), and the Nikon is out because of it's bulk. Everyone gravitates towards the small, light, handy A6000 and it's tiny yet rather high quality lenses. When Canon can compete head to head with that, both body and lenses as well as extensive feature set, at the same price point (lately that's been $548 for the body, $699 for body+lens), then I think they will have a mirrorless offering that can compete in the US. Then I'll be able to put two competitive mirrorless cameras on the table and tell my young padawans the same thing, and maybe have a real contest on my hands.


Anyway, I could pick up the A6000 and two lenses (16-55 and 50-200 I think they are) for under a grand. The IQ is phenomenal, you get 11fps, the AF system is awesome...I think it's as good as Canon or Nikon AF systems, once you get a handle on it, it's ultra light, super small, as are the lenses. It's a pocket camera. It's APS-C, so the 50-200 is really like a 75-300 on FF. I can do a lot with that kind of focal length, for birds and wildlife. And I could have it on me every single day. I would feel much better lugging around <$1000 worth of gear than lugging around >$25,000 worth of gear...and I'd stop missing moments.


The newer Sony cameras also have a very intriguing feature for the humming bird and songbird flight photographers around. They paired a smartphone app with their cameras, that uses the wifi feature to allow full wireless remote control of the camera. You could pop the A6000 on a tripod, set it in front of a trumpet vine setup or something like that, and snap photos of hummingbirds all day long. You wouldn't need to lug around a large laptop, or even a tablet. There are innovations out there that neither Canon nor Nikon have touched yet, and they really need to. If Canon could bring a product like this to market, people in the states would gobble it up in a heartbeat. Maybe they will...they did enter into that patent sharing agreement with Microsoft...maybe there is something in the works. If so, I would love to see it, and soon. 




Stu_bert said:


> Same with tablet. They (Apple, Samsung etc) face the same challenges as Canon, Nikon etc convincing people to change to the latest model when the step-changes are not there. I think that's why Sony is looking at sensors in cars and the like, as there's a equally large market there, and of course security devices which Canon has just bought into. All signs that for the sort of equipment that people here buy & use, that market is shrinking rapidly. I agree a lot with Tom Hogan when he identifies shortcomings in workflow / integration, I just dont think Canon & Nikon have the capability in SW dev - not really their forte. They're gonna stick to their bread n butter.





Aye, I think this is dead on as well. That's an area where Samsung probably has the best legs to stand on, as they do know software fairly well. At least they know Android. I think my new Samsung TV, which has a bunch of apps build in, is also Android. It's rock solid. I never even plugged it into cable...I canceled that ages ago. I just plugged in a power cord, and connected it to my WiFi. I use NetFlix, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, etc. for all my entertainment. It's been amazing ditching the old ball and chain that is Cable TV. Such a drag paying, what, $80 a month for 900 channels you don't want, five hundred hours a month worth of commercials...and three channels you actually are interested in? Archaic. I get all my entertainment on demand, in 4k most of the time now or at least Super HD, and it's been flawless. Tough to say that about many devices these days.


The NX1 has that programmable hardware, which is one of the things I'm most intrigued by. I don't even think Sony could compete with Samsung on that front at the moment, although they are starting to do interesting things on the software front. Like that WiFi control app for the phone. I think that's going to become a staple in the future...direct app-accessibility of camera functionality. Preferably without any wires. Nikon and Canon both need to get on the ball on that front. I can't wait for the day I could control not only a camera, but a host of wireless flashes, in that same hummingbird setup. With a 4k (I think one of these has already hit the shelves) smartphone. Now THAT would be the day. I no longer care so much who does it, although I don't expect Canon to be the first one there. I figure I'll own Canon, Sony and Samsung, both bodies and lenses, soon enough here. 





Stu_bert said:


> Fortunately, there aren't a huge amount of lenses left that Canon need to replace for my needs, and as you say the ability to put them onto other bodies is appealing. I think the only remaining challenge on lenses is how to make them "built like a tank", but really light. DO is interesting, but not quite the step-change required. (As an aside, I'm always puzzled as to why Nikon has not followed Canon into the film industry. My only guess would be cash-flow, and the investment required is significant... )





Yeah, not sure how "tank" and "light weight" will go together. I wouldn't say that Sony lenses are tanks...they are light, but, they do kind of feel fragile. They are so light, however, that if I dropped one a foot or two, I wouldn't really be concerned...but I wouldn't call them rugged. My Canon L series lenses, on the other hand, are definitely rugged. With weather sealed lenses, I've taken my Canon gear through every kind of weather and precipitation there is, with the exception of a hurricane, and they've come out fine. They've been drenched in rain driven by 40mph winds, hailed on, snowed on, sleeted on, dropped in the mud, blasted by wind. I'd say Canon lenses are definitely tanks. That's why I stick with them for my serious bird and wildlife photography. I'm hoping the 5D IV has some seriously improved high ISO IQ as well...the 5D III is feeling a bit long in the tooth. Its decent, but it's also over three years old, and this technology moves pretty fast. While I don't expect it to score well on the DR front, the 5Ds does have a recognizable improvement in overall IQ at low ISO, as does the 7D II at higher ISO. If the 5D IV can bring that kind of IQ improvement to the table, then I'd be satisfied replacing my 5D III with it.


Plus, there is something to be said about a large aperture. I don't mean relative aperture, I mean physical aperture. The larger the diameter of a lens, the greater it's potential to resolve detail. Wide open you can look down the front of my 600mm and the opening in the diaphragm is HUGE. Not enough diffraction there to cause any problems, and the CA is very well controlled. There simply doesn't exist any kind of 600mm lens that is naively built for most mirrorless systems, and capable of high speed AF, definitely not Sony or Samsung.


----------



## zlatko (Mar 29, 2015)

Trevster said:


> I put in an order for the 5DS R, and one of the things that I plan to do is use it hand-held at 1600 iso to take photos of paintings in museums (so I can zoom in on detail, like how an eye was painted, etc). I'm also a painter.
> 
> Is it unreasonable to think that I could get photos as sharp as I do with a hand held 7D with a 24-70mm f/2.8L II lens? Or does the increased mp also demand a tripod (which is something that can't be used, at say, the MET). Reading about the new mirror vibration control system is making me think that maybe it will be very hard to use this hand held indoors.
> 
> ...



Increased mp never demands greater steadiness. Mp doesn't increase the degree of blur that results from unsteadiness. However, increased enlargement demands greater steadiness. So the question is whether you will be making bigger prints or viewing the images larger.


----------



## Stu_bert (Mar 29, 2015)

jrista said:


> I dunno. I used to think the same way, but I've come to the conclusion that diversity is great. I want an A6000 myself, if for some reason the NX1 doesn't pan out. I may get one even IF the NX1 pans out, as it's just so small, light, and...cost effective! I was pretty hard-core Canon in the past, but I like not limiting myself in my equipment choices.



I want to produce pictures that please me. I'm happy with most of my Canon kit, but it's not an exclusive relationship 




jrista said:


> Regarding AF performance, just as with any camera brand AF performance is often dependent on the lenses. Not every lens is equal in that respect...the same is true of Sony. Some lenses are better than others. I was experimenting with their 60mm macro last...that thing is tiny, ultra light, and snaps to focus in a heartbeat. The AF system is pretty sweet on the A6000, but it is a little complicated...about as complicated as a 5D III or 7D II. Takes some time to learn how to use it effectively.
> 
> 
> I think if you give yourself time to get used to a system, you can use any system effectively. Sony's system isn't without it's flaws...for sure. However, neither is Canon's. Having used the 5D III for a year now, while it's better in most respects than my 7D, both the 5D III and the 600mm lens have their quirky, fidgity moments that cost me shots. One of the things that drives me nuts about it is the way it hunts for focus...it always hunts in towards the photographer first, then out away. When your trying to lock onto a bird in flight after photographing another bird on the ground or on a tree in the foreground, that usually costs you the shot. Being at f/4, the hunt is slower as well, and even when it should lock onto the bird when it finally gets there, sometimes it just misses. I try to manually snap focus to infinity whenever I switch target types like that, but it doesn't always help.
> ...



Agree... the 1DX also does the same. In fact until v2 of the firmware it would sometimes stop focusing properly near infinity and never lock on. Which is somewhat annoying :



jrista said:


> As my 450D was my first camera, I never had a P&S before that, and the only other cameras I'd used prior to that were film cameras, I've never enjoyed images from camera phones. Even the great Lumia 1020 camera, which has a GREAT sensor, just lacks any kind of focus control, no thin depth of field, nothing that lends itself to creativity. There are some third-party lens addons that you can get for iPhones...they bring some additional capabilities, but...it's still a camera phone.
> 
> 
> I don't really even use my smartphone for snapshots. That's one of the reasons I want something like the A6000 and NX1...I want a CAMERA, something I can still take great photos with, but which is very light and will fit in a pocket. The NX1 may double as that, but I get the feeling it will be a little too big. Plus, the Sony lenses are incredibly light...I love em.



I got a GX1 for that purpose, but the lens disappoints me. Not sure a NX1 as you say, will be that size. It's funny, when I am travelling and therefore doing photography I am happy to walk around with two bodies all day, and I'm rarely bothered by it. Ok, a little bit  But I agree with your sentiments. When I used to drive to work I had a body, lens & tripod in the car. For casual stuff at some stage I will get a replacement for the GX1, just not sure what form it will be.



jrista said:


> The newer Sony cameras also have a very intriguing feature for the humming bird and songbird flight photographers around. They paired a smartphone app with their cameras, that uses the wifi feature to allow full wireless remote control of the camera. You could pop the A6000 on a tripod, set it in front of a trumpet vine setup or something like that, and snap photos of hummingbirds all day long. You wouldn't need to lug around a large laptop, or even a tablet. There are innovations out there that neither Canon nor Nikon have touched yet, and they really need to. If Canon could bring a product like this to market, people in the states would gobble it up in a heartbeat. Maybe they will...they did enter into that patent sharing agreement with Microsoft...maybe there is something in the works. If so, I would love to see it, and soon.



Yeah I have to use camranger for that purpose... and of course it's not free. I think you're right, both Samsung and Sony understand the sw better, and will show that...



jrista said:


> Aye, I think this is dead on as well. That's an area where Samsung probably has the best legs to stand on, as they do know software fairly well. At least they know Android. I think my new Samsung TV, which has a bunch of apps build in, is also Android. It's rock solid. I never even plugged it into cable...I canceled that ages ago. I just plugged in a power cord, and connected it to my WiFi. I use NetFlix, Amazon Prime, HBO Go, etc. for all my entertainment. It's been amazing ditching the old ball and chain that is Cable TV. Such a drag paying, what, $80 a month for 900 channels you don't want, five hundred hours a month worth of commercials...and three channels you actually are interested in? Archaic. I get all my entertainment on demand, in 4k most of the time now or at least Super HD, and it's been flawless. Tough to say that about many devices these days.



I have a Samsung BR player and as you say, they're great for Apps. I use the iplayer (being a brit), Plex client etc and indeed the cable box stays off. On demand streaming is the way to go, but it will be interesting to see if the price is much cheaper. In the UK you can get netflix & amazon, but they're not that cheap in comparison...



jrista said:


> The NX1 has that programmable hardware, which is one of the things I'm most intrigued by. I don't even think Sony could compete with Samsung on that front at the moment, although they are starting to do interesting things on the software front. Like that WiFi control app for the phone. I think that's going to become a staple in the future...direct app-accessibility of camera functionality. Preferably without any wires. Nikon and Canon both need to get on the ball on that front. I can't wait for the day I could control not only a camera, but a host of wireless flashes, in that same hummingbird setup. With a 4k (I think one of these has already hit the shelves) smartphone. Now THAT would be the day. I no longer care so much who does it, although I don't expect Canon to be the first one there. I figure I'll own Canon, Sony and Samsung, both bodies and lenses, soon enough here.



Agree completely. Canon and Nikon dont seem to have the right focus, which is a shame. Sony & Samsung both do 4K smartphones I believe.



jrista said:


> Yeah, not sure how "tank" and "light weight" will go together. I wouldn't say that Sony lenses are tanks...they are light, but, they do kind of feel fragile. They are so light, however, that if I dropped one a foot or two, I wouldn't really be concerned...but I wouldn't call them rugged. My Canon L series lenses, on the other hand, are definitely rugged. With weather sealed lenses, I've taken my Canon gear through every kind of weather and precipitation there is, with the exception of a hurricane, and they've come out fine. They've been drenched in rain driven by 40mph winds, hailed on, snowed on, sleeted on, dropped in the mud, blasted by wind. I'd say Canon lenses are definitely tanks. That's why I stick with them for my serious bird and wildlife photography.



I think there will be materials in the 10 years time which will replace the shell of the lens, and maybe even the glass with lighter but equally strong materials. And that will probably be the only thing that makes me change any of my lenses again. I've dunked myself, the body and the lens in a stream before. Dried them all out and they all worked fine 



jrista said:


> I'm hoping the 5D IV has some seriously improved high ISO IQ as well...the 5D III is feeling a bit long in the tooth. Its decent, but it's also over three years old, and this technology moves pretty fast. While I don't expect it to score well on the DR front, the 5Ds does have a recognizable improvement in overall IQ at low ISO, as does the 7D II at higher ISO. If the 5D IV can bring that kind of IQ improvement to the table, then I'd be satisfied replacing my 5D III with it.
> 
> 
> Plus, there is something to be said about a large aperture. I don't mean relative aperture, I mean physical aperture. The larger the diameter of a lens, the greater it's potential to resolve detail. Wide open you can look down the front of my 600mm and the opening in the diaphragm is HUGE. Not enough diffraction there to cause any problems, and the CA is very well controlled. There simply doesn't exist any kind of 600mm lens that is naively built for most mirrorless systems, and capable of high speed AF, definitely not Sony or Samsung.



Completely open to see what happens later in the year, but open to other manufacturers (if I can retain my Canon glass). For now, I'm pretty content with what I have, just need to find the time to do more with it. Have fun with the NX1....


----------



## weixing (Mar 29, 2015)

zlatko said:


> Trevster said:
> 
> 
> > I put in an order for the 5DS R, and one of the things that I plan to do is use it hand-held at 1600 iso to take photos of paintings in museums (so I can zoom in on detail, like how an eye was painted, etc). I'm also a painter.
> ...


Hi,
High MP will make unsteadiness more obvious especially there is a button call "100%"... :'(

Have a nice day.


----------



## 9VIII (Mar 29, 2015)

weixing said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > Trevster said:
> ...



The amount that you need to increase stability is proportional to pixel pitch. An easy way to think about it is imagine you're shooting on crop and adjust your shutter speed accordingly.
So a 50mm lens may have been sharp at 1/50sec before, but pretending you're shooting on crop you would want 1/80sec.
You can get tack sharp images of hummingbirds flapping their wings at 1/2000sec, worst case you can just crank up the shutter speed and forget about technique, everyone is different though so the better you are at stability the lower you'll be able to get your shutter speed.
Last week I got some handheld shots with my 400f5.6 (640mm equivalent on crop) reasonably sharp at 1/350sec, I was sitting on the ground resting the camera on my knee, but I didn't need a tripod to deal with fading light.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 29, 2015)

Stu_bert said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > The newer Sony cameras also have a very intriguing feature for the humming bird and songbird flight photographers around. They paired a smartphone app with their cameras, that uses the wifi feature to allow full wireless remote control of the camera. You could pop the A6000 on a tripod, set it in front of a trumpet vine setup or something like that, and snap photos of hummingbirds all day long. You wouldn't need to lug around a large laptop, or even a tablet. There are innovations out there that neither Canon nor Nikon have touched yet, and they really need to. If Canon could bring a product like this to market, people in the states would gobble it up in a heartbeat. Maybe they will...they did enter into that patent sharing agreement with Microsoft...maybe there is something in the works. If so, I would love to see it, and soon.
> ...



Yeh, Sony are really innovative for that :

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/standard_display/EOS_app

P.S. In case anybody missed the irony tags I should probably point out the above linked Canon App came out in 2012 and works on several Canon cameras.


----------



## privatebydesign (Mar 29, 2015)

9VIII said:


> weixing said:
> 
> 
> > zlatko said:
> ...



Only if you are going to view at unequal magnifications, if you view both outputs at the same subject size (which you should) there is no difference.


----------

