EOS 5Ds- why all this negativity?

[AlterEgo]

No change in trend, certainly. But the current momentum (in terms of landscape photographers, at least) is away from Canon, and that will only continue, if not accelerate, if Canon's DR doesn't hold up.

there is no trend recently... whoever was destined to defect already defected... Canon marketshare does not suffer recently and it won't suffer once they have 50 vs 50 and not 36 vs 21

[shadowblade]

there is no trend recently... whoever was destined to defect already defected... Canon marketshare does not suffer recently and it won't suffer once they have 50 vs 50 and not 36 vs 21

I think a lot of people have been waiting to see what Canon managed to do with its next generation before making a decision one way or another. That is, not ditching Canon just yet, but not buying new lenses and sinking more into the system either, but waiting to see if Canon improved before deciding to either stay or change.

If the final product shows no significant improvement in DR (i.e. no real improvements in two generations), I think we'll see a lot more landscape/non-action photographers changing systems.

[digitaldog]

I think a lot of people have been waiting to see what Canon managed to do with its next generation before making a decision one way or another. That is, not ditching Canon just yet, but not buying new lenses and sinking more into the system either, but waiting to see if Canon improved before deciding to either stay or change.

I certainly fall into that camp! Sony's solutions are looking more interesting by the day.

[AlterEgo]

Sony's solutions are looking more interesting by the day.

Sony Semi or Sony Imaging ? because Sony Semi did not make a new FF sensor (A7s does not count in DR/resolution dept and @ high gains dialed in Canon sensors in Canon cameras are closing in) for a long long time really

[digitaldog]

Sony Semi or Sony Imaging ?

You pick.
peace.

[Phil Indeblanc]

Hi dear Collegues,
....

I just don´t understand why Canon publishes this crap first hand.This is the first touch everyone experiences and a single image can make or break a brand.Someone should get FIRED at CANON PR.

That is what happened to Kodak. They had a fantastic SLRc DSLR(14mp), and they totally blew the intended use of the camera and it was gone very quickly)....
*Not that Canon is going anywhere if they even miss this mark, and I don't think they have.

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

My take is that previously Canon had two problems:

• They didn't offer a high resolution camera
• They lag in DR compared the competition

Now, with 5Ds they are down to one problem.

Just to say, Canon photographers have produced excellent images with existing cameras for a long time.

Best regards
Erik

[shadowblade]

Just to say, Canon photographers have produced excellent images with existing cameras for a long time.

That's because the quality of the photo has nothing to do with the quality of the camera.

A better camera doesn't let you take better photos. It merely lets you take the same photos you usually do in a wider range of lighting situations. I can take a great landscape with an iPhone, provided the lighting is just right. Any deviation from those conditions and it's no dice.

[Cayman]

I have quite a lot invested in the Canon system and I have been shooting it for years.  The last body I bought though was the 5D Mark II.   I recently decided to test the Nikon waters with the D810, 14-24mm, and Sigma 50 art.  I've been pretty blown away with the D810.  After a few days of utter confusion, I find I like the interface far better than Canon.   Things just make more sense and you don't need to go into menu's all the time.  The features and image quality are a really big jump from the Mark II.

I was using the Magic Lantern, but that to me is an absolutely horrible user interface and I really hated having to use it.   I want to concentrate on the image and not be fiddling in menus all the time.

On this announcement, I suspected Canon wouldn't make any dynamic range strides (or possibly make things worse), but was hoping for a suprise.   I still have all my Canon gear, and I think Canon has the best lens lineup.  I have so much invested in Canon glass.....   Perhaps I will shoot two systems and try and use the strengths of each.   Perhaps Sony will come out with a professional level mirrorless camera and I will go the route of using a Canon adapter.    I imagine we are in for a multiyear wait for any future sensor innovation from Canon.

[shadowblade]

I have quite a lot invested in the Canon system and I have been shooting it for years.  The last body I bought though was the 5D Mark II.   I recently decided to test the Nikon waters with the D810, 14-24mm, and Sigma 50 art.  I've been pretty blown away with the D810.  After a few days of utter confusion, I find I like the interface far better than Canon.   Things just make more sense and you don't need to go into menu's all the time.  The features and image quality are a really big jump from the Mark II.

I was using the Magic Lantern, but that to me is an absolutely horrible user interface and I really hated having to use it.   I want to concentrate on the image and not be fiddling in menus all the time.

On this announcement, I suspected Canon wouldn't make any dynamic range strides (or possibly make things worse), but was hoping for a suprise.   I still have all my Canon gear, and I think Canon has the best lens lineup.  I have so much invested in Canon glass.....   Perhaps I will shoot two systems and try and use the strengths of each.   Perhaps Sony will come out with a professional level mirrorless camera and I will go the route of using a Canon adapter.    I imagine we are in for a multiyear wait for any future sensor innovation from Canon.

If it weren't for the Canon TS-E lenses, I'd be shooting a D810.

As it is, I'm currently using a pair of A7r bodies with Metabones adapters.

If DxO testing confirms that Canon hasn't improved their DR, I'll probably end up shooting the D810 successor as my main body, with a Sony A9 or A7rII exclusively for use with TS-E lenses.

[dwswager]

That's because the quality of the photo has nothing to do with the quality of the camera.

A better camera doesn't let you take better photos. It merely lets you take the same photos you usually do in a wider range of lighting situations. I can take a great landscape with an iPhone, provided the lighting is just right. Any deviation from those conditions and it's no dice.

While I think I understand what you are trying to say, that is just nonsense.  It's the same as saying that the quality of the paper, ink and printer has nothing to do with the quality of the print.  Photography has an artistic and technical side.  The technical part plays into how well one is able to translate the artistic vision.

[Hans Kruse]

Probably 80-90% of my Canon (5D2) landscapes were blended.

Only around 10% of my Sony A7r shots are.

The starting point for my photos is a bracket sequence where I choose the optimal exposed shot in post processing. This will often give you1 or 2 stops more than of you don't do that. Therefore you may blend a lot more photos due to that. I'm speculating because I have seen this a lot. I haven't seen you landscape shots so this makes a bit difficult to comment on, but you have in my opinion a very high percentage that need to be blended. Alternatively you can take a look at my shots a see if yours are very different in terms of shooting conditions.

[shadowblade]

The starting point for my photos is a bracket sequence where I choose the optimal exposed shot in post processing. This will often give you1 or 2 stops more than of you don't do that. Therefore you may blend a lot more photos due to that. I'm speculating because I have seen this a lot. I haven't seen you landscape shots so this makes a bit difficult to comment on, but you have in my opinion a very high percentage that need to be blended. Alternatively you can take a look at my shots a see if yours are very different in terms of shooting conditions.

Looking through your photos, it seems that I often shoot in harsher light than you. Also, I print very large and am very particular about details, even in the deepest of shadows - I often blend shadows where others would simply accept noisier or less-detailed shadows.

[Phil Indeblanc]

Looking through your photos, it seems that I often shoot in harsher light than you. Also, I print very large and am very particular about details, even in the deepest of shadows - I often blend shadows where others would simply accept noisier or less-detailed shadows.

Would love to see some examples or link Shadowblade.

But its true, There are a number of groups to fall into, as differnet folks have different expectations of their work, the shooting conditions, and other variables that will change our needs, and tools we use.

[shadowblade]

While I think I understand what you are trying to say, that is just nonsense.  It's the same as saying that the quality of the paper, ink and printer has nothing to do with the quality of the print.  Photography has an artistic and technical side.  The technical part plays into how well one is able to translate the artistic vision.

No, technical limitations are like printer or monitor gamut.

If you print entirely in monochrome, you will never see the benefits of a greater colour gamut.

Similarly, if you shoot within the limitations of a camera system (i.e. within the limitations of ISO, dynamic range and print size as dictated by resolution) you can capture any scene, however creative, within the limitations of that system. It's only when you run into one of the limit that you encounter problems in translating your vision. With some cameras, e.g. phone cameras, the limits are very narrow, and almost all photographers will regularly shoot outside of those limits. With others, the limits are much wider - that's why many people can make do with either a Nikon or Canon full-frame SLR system, with only certain select groups of photographers, who regularly shoot at the limits, encountering problems with one system that switching to the other resolves.

[Hans Kruse]

Looking through your photos, it seems that I often shoot in harsher light than you. Also, I print very large and am very particular about details, even in the deepest of shadows - I often blend shadows where others would simply accept noisier or less-detailed shadows.

I never print larger than A2+ and for that size I do not have issues with noise or lack of details. I see a lot of photos that have too much detail in the shadows. But that is a personal preference, of course. I would be interested in seeing your photos. Do you have a website that you could link to?

[dwswager]

No, technical limitations are like printer or monitor gamut.

If you print entirely in monochrome, you will never see the benefits of a greater colour gamut.

Similarly, if you shoot within the limitations of a camera system (i.e. within the limitations of ISO, dynamic range and print size as dictated by resolution) you can capture any scene, however creative, within the limitations of that system. It's only when you run into one of the limit that you encounter problems in translating your vision. With some cameras, e.g. phone cameras, the limits are very narrow, and almost all photographers will regularly shoot outside of those limits. With others, the limits are much wider - that's why many people can make do with either a Nikon or Canon full-frame SLR system, with only certain select groups of photographers, who regularly shoot at the limits, encountering problems with one system that switching to the other resolves.

I agree.  In the entire universe of photo opportunities, most cameras can technically execute the vast majority.  It is at the margins that something like the D810 out performs the 5Ds on DR and vice versa on MP.

[digitaldog]

If you print entirely in monochrome, you will never see the benefits of a greater colour gamut.

Not sure that is internally true. If OOG colors can't be captured, you can't convert them to monochrome (not that OOG is often an issue with these kinds of devices).
If you have the same sRGB and ProPhoto RGB image, it's possible the later could produce a different (better?) monochrome conversion.  

[Hans Kruse]

No, technical limitations are like printer or monitor gamut.

If you print entirely in monochrome, you will never see the benefits of a greater colour gamut.

Similarly, if you shoot within the limitations of a camera system (i.e. within the limitations of ISO, dynamic range and print size as dictated by resolution) you can capture any scene, however creative, within the limitations of that system. It's only when you run into one of the limit that you encounter problems in translating your vision. With some cameras, e.g. phone cameras, the limits are very narrow, and almost all photographers will regularly shoot outside of those limits. With others, the limits are much wider - that's why many people can make do with either a Nikon or Canon full-frame SLR system, with only certain select groups of photographers, who regularly shoot at the limits, encountering problems with one system that switching to the other resolves.

With both the D810 and the 5D III I will have shots that fall outside the capability of the cameras. For the 5D III it falls shot way before the D810, but in both cases bracketing and blending solves the problem. If the number of blends needed would be very large with the 5D III and very low in the same situation with the D810 then the 5D III would be problematic. I love the DR of the D810, but I can mange well with the 5D III as well with blending when needed. I shoot a lot with the 5D III and the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II lens and I don't a lens that nice for the D810. Also I often prefer the colors from the Canon. So sometimes I will shoot a scene with both cameras and choose the best.

[asnapper]

From DPReview

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/5

"As far as dynamic range is concerned, we're told that the new 5DS and 5DS R should give the same performance as the current EOS 5D Mark III. If true, this means that the new cameras won't be able to offer the same industry-leading dynamic range of Sony's current APS-C and full-frame sensors, but at least it isn't a step backwards. And hey - 50MP!"

By the time the New 5D's are available in June I expect there will be a new Sony mirrorless camera which will have a new Sony 50MP Bayer sensor, which will also find its way into a Nikon DSLR and maybe even a Pentax DSLR. I have a collection of C/Y lenses and Canon T/S lenses so for me the best option will likely be Sony, especially if the DR is noticeable better than the Canon 5D's. Its sad to say that Canon appear to be stood still and are no longer innovators, but I'm sure the 5D's will sell well, but for me a 2nd generation A7 series camera with IBIS and a higher resolution sensor sounds very appealing, even more appealing would be a professional A9 with a none Bayer stacked CMOS sensor