5DSR or 5DS?

<p>Finally, I'm upgrading my 5D MK II to 5Ds R or 5Ds soon. I've been researching both... I mostly shoot natural landscape, wildlife, and tourism. I'm wondering if 5DsR make a big difference from 5Ds? </p>

<p> </p>

<p>Since you're buying a 50.6 MP DSLR and you shoot natural landscapes, I assume that you'd want to extract every ounce of detail from your subjects. If that's true, get the 5DSR.</p>

<p>Or, in Canon's own words:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"With all the features and capabilities of the EOS 5DS, the EOS 5DS R camera offers the potential for even greater sharpness and fine detail for specialized situations. It features the same Canon designed and manufactured 50.6 Megapixel sensor, with the low-pass filter* (LPF) effect cancelled to provide even more fine edge sharpness and detail for critical subjects such as detailed landscapes, and other situations where getting the sharpest subject detail is a priority."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>True, but comparing low ISO files between my 7D MkII and my 5DsR (same pixel-density), you have to look at 400% and then it's very little difference. At ISO 1600 and above, the 5DsR pulls ahead, but you don't shoot most landscapes at an ISO that high. I don't regret the purchase of the R-version, but I doubt that'll it'll make a visible difference, even in prints over 50".</p>

<p>Even Canon's own sample image shows the difference is quite subtle -</p>

<p>https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/explore/product-showcases/cameras-and-lenses/high-resolution-eos-5ds-vs-5dsr</p>

<p>The 5Ds R gets a tiny bit more detail. It also runs a bit more risk of moire patterns.</p>

<p>Two ways of looking at this: The 5Ds has lots of resolution so will be pretty well better than anything else out there if capturing detail is your aim. The 5Dsr will capturing a tiny bit more, but with greater risk of moire.</p>

<p>You could argue that having such a lot of resolution anyway means you can afford to minimize moire issues and get the 5Ds. On the other hand you could also argue that moire may be a very rare occurrence and that you can cope with it when it occurs. Frankly I doubt it makes much difference which one you get in practice. It will be interesting to see whether Canon will persist with 2 different 5Dss or will harmonize to one as Nikon did with the D810. Perhaps Canon will see which one sells best and then unify into one 5Ds.</p>

<p>BTW, I shoot mostly birds and wildlife, where moire is rare, but not totally non-existent. I've noticed no moire in those images. With travel and landscapes, I've taken quite a few architectural shots, with no moire that I've noticed. I've shot no shots of patterned fabrics, which tend to aggravate moire.</p>

<p>I'm around 30,000-shots on my 5DsR body. I use DxO's Optics Pro and do leave its Moire Filter on Automatic. </p>

<p>Even Canon's own sample image shows the difference is quite subtle -</p>

<p>Canon U.S.A., Inc. | High Resolution - EOS 5DS vs EOS 5DS R</p>

<p>The 5Ds R gets a tiny bit more detail. It also runs a bit more risk of moiré patterns.</p>

 

Years since I last logged in... I did notice that the 5DS R did show noticeably more very subtle surface skin detail, the 5DS looked quite smoothed over in comparison despite otherwise very similar in detail resolution. Still deciding whether to go mirrorless/DSLR to replace my EOS 1n/1v's.

For ordinary purposes, 10 or 12 Mega Pixels are pretty adequate.

 

On the other hand, if you want to read the talking points from the "My Pillow" Alpha-Hotel's notes across the White House lawn, the more pixels the better.

 

Whichever you get, note that you probably also need to get new lenses that have the capability to use that extra information.

Edited January 16, 2021 by JDMvW

I opted for the 5DSR two years ago. I shoot primarily landscapes and architecture but motor racing a few times a year. I have never seen moire, even in fine branches, and never some of the discoloration in those that I have had before. Canon 17 TS-E is my most used lens. I have done some family gatherings too, and no problems with clothing so far.

 

Don't worry about lenses, it is truly amazing what the 5DSR can pull out of them. I have used 5 lenses from the 70's and they absolutely shine. In my opinion 50 MP finally equates to Kodachrome 25 and Velvia 50, providing much better depth of colour and fine detail over the 21 MP body I used for 7 years. Shifting and stitching makes it easily compete with my 6x6 images of the 90's.

 

Grab a new one if you still can.

Don't worry about lenses, it is truly amazing what the 5DSR can pull out of them. I have used 5 lenses from the 70's and they absolutely shine.

 

Of course the old lenses are as good as they ever were.

 

However, if you look at the actual acuity/resolution of some of the older lenses they are NOT using all of the resolution available on the newest cameras. I haven't checked, but I suspect that the TS-E 17mm (which is also one of my favorite lenses even on my MP-challenged cameras) is OK.

The 17 TS-E and likely the 24 TS-E will be good beyond 100 MP FF.

 

My Nikon 8mm f2.8 is not in the same league as the TS-E lenses but everytime I increase my MP it gets better. First used it on 14 MP FF, then 21MP FF, and now on 5DSR at 50 MP. I tested it against the EF 8-15mm briefly and while the EF had better micro contrast the 40 year old Nikon still resolved the same detail and had less distortion. Won't be switching.

 

I doubt the EF 800/5.6 L would be worth the value of all my equipment combined over the FD 800/5.6 L, and it is superb on the 5DSR even with teleconverters.

 

I have yet to properly test the FD 55/1.2 Aspherical but results are outstanding. I may never have a reference lens to test it against though. Considering it's reputation back then it may in fact be superior to the EF and RF. The FD 50/3.5 Macro is much sharper, so it to will go to 100 MP no problem.