5DS or 5DSR?

[Jeremy Roussak]

For landscape and occasional wildlife, is the R worth the extra £200 or so?

Jeremy

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

For landscape and occasional wildlife, is the R worth the extra £200 or so?

Hi Jeremy,

I have not seen any good and quantifiable comparisons between the two, but the difference in image quality will probably be marginal. A lot will depend on the lens as well, and stopping down to f/5.6 or narrower will reduce the differences even further. You will probably see the largest difference  at approx. f/4, and only in the plane of optimal focus (DOF is relatively thin with such small photosites).

So it depends on the shooting scenario, lens quality + distance + focal length + aperture used (use of sturdy tripod is assumed). In printed output the differences will be even harder to see, unless close-ups are compared side by side. Postprocessing makes a difference as well, and the 5DS will be more forgiving there when aliasing is present.

But we'd really need a good quantitative comparison, e.g. a star target shot, to see how sensitive the 5DS R is to aliasing, and how much closer it gets to resolving the limiting resolution, before we could decide if the additional cost is justified.

Cheers,
Bart

[torger]

I think the R will be more attractive on the second hand market, most want the R.

Rationally speaking I think the non-R is better because I think aliasing is a bigger problem to image quality than a tiny tiny loss in resolution. With small aperture and landscape aliasing will rarely be a real problem though. Maybe bird feathers can show some aliasing in a large aperture shot.

If I would only shoot small aperture landscape I might choose the R, but when you throw some wide aperture photography in the mix I'd choose the S.

It should be said that I'm better at detecting (and disliking) aliasing issues than most, most think it's just about moire but it's also about small detail color errors and false detail.

[johnnycash]

Jeremy, I happened to use both for few weeks since I had first bought a 5DS (now sold to my friend) and when Canon finally released first 5DSR units, got the R I originally wanted.

I have shot both 5DS and 5DSR using Otus Distagon 55mm f/1.4 to see the differences. My general impression with 5DS coming from 5D3, was good.

However, I was never satisfied with the level of detail. The reason why I sold the 5DS was the loss in resolution which was, at least to me a big thing and I have observed it when shooting wide open at f/1.4 to f/2 with the Otus. Shooting at f/2.8 with EF 24-70 f/2.8L II didn't result in a dramatic change and shooting over the diffraction limit at f/5.6-6.3 (using the Otus) I haven't seen a difference (I have shot comparison portraits in studio at f/9 with strobes) and printed cropped images on A2 format.
I have never came across aliasing problems using 5DSR. Maybe shooting over the diffraction limit also happens to minimise it.

I think the 5DSR is worth the small price extra, as torger says, the resale value will be higher or at least the liquidity of the R will be better.

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Jeremy, I happened to use both for few weeks since I had first bought a 5DS (now sold to my friend) and when Canon finally released first 5DSR units, got the R I originally wanted.

I have shot both 5DS and 5DSR using Otus Distagon 55mm f/1.4 to see the differences. My general impression with 5DS coming from 5D3, was good.

However, I was never satisfied with the level of detail.

Hi,

I always wonder if people use the correct sharpening tools. With such tiny sensels, deconvolution Capture sharpening makes a huge difference. The 5DS allows better deconvolution sharpening because there is less aliasing to spoil the fun. In addition, a tool like Topaz Detail will potentially make such a large difference to how your image looks, the marginal differences between the  5DS and 5DS R won't be really that noticeable, even when pixel peeping, and especially in print.

I have never came across aliasing problems using 5DSR. Maybe shooting over the diffraction limit also happens to minimise it.

Yes, there are a few prerequisites to even generate aliasing.
- First, to see it clearly, the subject matter must be super critical. Many subjects are, like architecture with repetitive patterns at an angle, sharp edges and lines, etc. The OP mentioned wildlife, and feathers and fur, or maybe branches or grass can also cause a challenge.
- Second, only the plane of best focus will basically allow to create aliasing, because defocus is a powerful blurring tool that will reduce resolution of the optical signal to below the Nyquist frequency. The DOF zone is relatively narrow for such densely packed sensors if you seek per-pixel sharpness.
- Third, residual lens aberrations and Diffraction will kill resolution. The 4.14 micron sensel pitch will show the onset of contrast softening due to diffraction from f/4.5 or f/5, and gets progressively worse with narrower apertures. But diffraction blur can be reasonably well reduced with deconvolution sharpening.

Cheers,
Bart

[johnnycash]

Well said, Bart.

[LesPalenik]

I always wonder if people use the correct sharpening tools. With such tiny sensels, deconvolution Capture sharpening makes a huge difference. The 5DS allows better deconvolution sharpening because there is less aliasing to spoil the fun. In addition, a tool like Topaz Detail will potentially make such a large difference to how your image looks

Bart, if you are going to use Topaz Detail, will you apply initially a basic sharpening in LR or C1 or do you sharpen it entirely in Topaz Detail?

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Bart, if you are going to use Topaz Detail, will you apply initially a basic sharpening in LR or C1 or do you sharpen it entirely in Topaz Detail?

Hi Les,

In general they're separate steps, unless I'm in a hurry (and especially for downsampling) which is where Topaz Detail could do all the heavy lifting, with the Deblur control for Capture (or post-resampling) sharpening, and the Detail sliders for controlling various levels/sizes of feature detail.

My more involved routine processing is:
1. Raw conversion with C1 without added sharpening (via a checkbox in the output recipe),
2. add Topaz Clarity (and maybe some Topaz Adjust) for tonality,
3. add Capture sharpening in a Luminosity Blend-if layer in Photoshop with FocusMagic or Topaz Infocus,
4. do creative (and output) 'sharpening' with Topaz Detail.

The disabling of C1's sharpening is mainly due to lack of a Deconvolution Capture sharpening option, which is a pity, also because C1 allows to correct for sharpness fall-off.

Step 3 can be tweaked and masked if needed, but can also be switched off e.g. before downsampling. The Capture sharpening could also be replaced by Topaz Detail's Deblur control, but it offers a bit less control than a separate layer can. Topaz Detail gives huge control over the level of detail in an image, and also allows to get some control over the look at different viewing distances, e.g. for large format output. If one has no FocusMagic or Topaz Infocus, then Topaz Detail could almost do it all.

Cheers,
Bart

[Jeremy Roussak]

For completeness, I'll record that I bought the S, for financial reasons: there was a 10% discount offered on the S but not on the SR. The result was that it wasn't £200 cheaper, it was £500 cheaper. That's quite a lot, really: half a decent lens.

Jeremy

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Welcome to the club, Jeremy.

[Robert DeCandido PhD]

Yes the "s" is fine...plenty of detail...this from the recent snowstorm in NYC...along the Bronx River with the 5Ds and 16-35 F4 Canon lens

[John Koerner]

For landscape and occasional wildlife, is the R worth the extra £200 or so?
Jeremy

I personally went with the Nikon D810.

It would be hard to justify buying the Canons at even money, but to me there was no way I was going to pay $1000 extra for the 5D-series over the D810.

Canon 5DSr - $3,899
Canon 5DS - $3,699
Nikon D810 - $2,796

Buying the Nikon D810 gave me a $900 savings over the 5DS and an $1,100 savings over the $5DSr ... and for (IMO) a better overall camera to boot.

While the Canon 5DS (and Sr) have better resolution, the Nikon D810 has better everything else (from DR, to color range, to tonal range, etc.).

In 2 years, I believe the D810 will be worth more than the 5DS(r) duo also ... because it is an across-the-board better camera ... and while the Canons may have more mpx, they can't really keep their heads above water in the rest of the important categories.

I am not sure how many Canon lenses you have (and if I had a bunch of Canon lenses to dump, it might not have been worth the switch), but for me personally, with only a handful of Canon lenses, I actually broke even after selling my Canon lenses on eBay while enjoying the $1,100 price advantage of the D810.

For landscape especially, I would have gone with the D810.

That's my $0.02.

[Paul2660]

Yes the "s" is fine...plenty of detail...this from the recent snowstorm in NYC...along the Bronx River with the 5Ds and 16-35 F4 Canon lens

Love that shot.  Thanks for sharing.

Paul C

[Colin Carter]

For landscapes go for the 5dsr, you'll only regret it if you don't and will always wonder what if.

I've just switched back from Nikon after 8 years and the 5dsr demolishes my old Nikon d810 for detail and colour reproduction, Canon have always had the best colours and the screen on the back of the canon is vastly better than the Nikon d810 for live view etc. Dynamic range is a non issue and you can easily lift shadows on the 5dsr a couple of stops without introducing noise (if you need to lift shadows more than that, I think you got the exposure wrong in camera in the first place or you should have used filters ).

[John Koerner]

For landscapes go for the 5dsr, you'll only regret it if you don't and will always wonder what if.

I've just switched back from Nikon after 8 years and the 5dsr demolishes my old Nikon d810 for detail and colour reproduction, Canon have always had the best colours and the screen on the back of the canon is vastly better than the Nikon d810 for live view etc. Dynamic range is a non issue and you can easily lift shadows on the 5dsr a couple of stops without introducing noise (if you need to lift shadows more than that, I think you got the exposure wrong in camera in the first place or you should have used filters ).

I don't know about the LCD comparison, but every actual sensor test I have seen shows the D810 is markedly better 5DSr in color rendition and dynamic range.

Check out either SenScore or the DxO Mark for reference.

SenScore rates the color transmission of the 5dSr as 751 compared to 1073 with the D810.
The DxO Mark rates the overall value of the 5DSr sensor as 86 compared to 97 with the D810.

So you must have got a good copy

The very fact that the Nikon D810 came out in 2014, and the Canon came out in 2015, and yet the Canon still can't keep its head above water in most categories, makes you wonder what the disparity will be when the D900 comes out

For me, although I have had some ergonomic hurdles, the difference between what the D810 produces and what my aged 7D produces is tragic.

I realize tomorrow something will come out "better" than the D810 ... but not by much.

At least not for a couple of years.

Jack

[Doug Peterson]

For landscapes go for the 5dsr, you'll only regret it if you don't and will always wonder what if.

Or if you ever try a digital back. 

[NancyP]

Not going there. Not. Not even to a 645Z "low end" MF.    I need to learn more and get better at post-processing what I do have (6D). And John K, your 7D served faithfully, but it is a 7 year old camera. Let it rest in peace, or sell or donate it.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

No opportunity shall be lost to turn a simple Canon question into a Canon vs. Nikon vs. medium format endless and fruitless debate

[Jeremy Roussak]

All of the comments above are jolly interesting, and would have been even more so if they had appeared in response to my original query, before I bought the 5Ds, rather than after the ship had sailed.

Now, however, we seem to be drifting off topic. Let's start a Canon v Nikon v MFDB thread somewhere else: I'm sure we've never had one before and equally sure it will engender rational, objective debate.

Jeremy (locking a thread for the first time - isn't life exciting?)