Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds  (Read 23411 times)

dhdhdh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« on: June 23, 2015, 11:42:51 pm »

Any thoughts about whether I should ditch my P45 in favor of the new Canon 50MP camera?  The 39MP Phase is a beautiful file, but I end up using the camera mostly in my studio as it's somewhat of a hassle to use on location.  And I'm a Canon shooter otherwise.

Any feedback from you pro's out there would be appreciated.

Thanks

DH
Logged

Ellis Vener

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2151
    • http://www.ellisvener.com
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #1 on: June 24, 2015, 09:10:01 am »

Canon is saying that the 5DS is best used as a studio camera and I am assuming that they are saying that because in the studio, with the camera on a tripod and using it with flash or HMI lighting so you'll get the full measure of possible image quality. But that is true of your PhaseOne gear as well.

But we are photographers right?  And we can't always work in ideal circumstances.

You might consider renting a 5Ds (try lens rentals.com) and making your own comparisons. I'd be really interested in seeing the results. Also let us know what software you'll be using to process the images with.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2015, 02:57:35 pm by Ellis Vener »
Logged

dhdhdh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #2 on: June 24, 2015, 09:55:57 am »

Thanks.  I don't think Canon is saying it's a studio camera -- they have stuff in that camera like some kind of flicker setting to deal with sodium vapor lights, stuff that you'd find when shooting on location. I believe they're hoping to sell this to landscape and architecture photographers, and, yes, studio photogs.

With my PhaseOne I've been using Capture One, but I'd use Photoshop/Bridge raw to open files with this the Canon.

Here's a quick comparison of sensors vs the Phase IQ160, which someone posted:  http://blog.crismanphoto.com/tech-post-canon-5d-mark-iii-5ds-and-phaseone-iq160-head-to-head/

I'm hoping, via this forum, to hear thoughts from others.

Thanks again

Logged

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2102
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #3 on: June 24, 2015, 10:18:29 am »

The Canon 5Ds(R) is no more a studio camera than the 5D III, 1DX or Nikon D810, D4S etc.

The resolution of this camera goes head to head with the Phase One IQ250 (50MP), Pentax 645Z. See studio scene http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/5

The dynamic range is inferior to these other cameras. We will also see the Sony A7R II at 42MP as a contender soon.

The Sony A7R II has electronic first curtain as has Canon 5Ds(R) (in live view) which is important to avoid shutter shake (not to speak of mirror slap!). The Nikon D810 has this as well but awkwardly implemented.

The dynamic range is the weak spot of the Canon, however with an optimal exposure almost any single RAW file will do. The 5Ds(R) does not have the dreaded banding that the 5D III (and II) has. Besides that Lightroom now has an excellent HDR function for these cases where a single exposure is not enough (same for Sony and Nikon but more seldomly so).

What speaks for the Canon in spite of the DR weakness is the excellent glass that Canon has brought out in the recent years, presumable to prepare for a high resolution sensor.

I think the suggestion of renting one with the Canon glass you might want to use is a good idea.

Ellis Vener

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2151
    • http://www.ellisvener.com
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #4 on: June 24, 2015, 10:40:46 am »

"The Canon 5Ds(R) is no more a studio camera than the 5D III, 1DX or Nikon D810, D4S etc. "

For the record I totally agree. And I've also used a Sinar 8x10 P2 outdoors on a rooftop and hung a Phaseone  Camera with a p45+ on the end of a tripod arm two feet out over the edge of a 65 story building.
Logged

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #5 on: June 24, 2015, 10:51:03 am »

The Canon 5Ds(R) is no more a studio camera than the 5D III, 1DX or Nikon D810, D4S etc.

The resolution of this camera goes head to head with the Phase One IQ250 (50MP), Pentax 645Z. See studio scene http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/5

 

I am very sorry for the off topic, but is DPR processing the PhaseOne RAW files in LR? The image has that trademark Adobe complimentary blur filter look and none of the crispness that one sees in capture one pro.

I would hazard a guess that the difference would be a lot more pronounced if the Phase files are processed in C1P.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2102
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #6 on: June 24, 2015, 11:05:22 am »

I am very sorry for the off topic, but is DPR processing the PhaseOne RAW files in LR? The image has that trademark Adobe complimentary blur filter look and none of the crispness that one sees in capture one pro.

I would hazard a guess that the difference would be a lot more pronounced if the Phase files are processed in C1P.


In my view dpreview do not sharpen optimally in ACR/LR. I have before compared C1 and LR in terms of sharpening and they are pretty equal when LR has applied the right sharpening parameters. I even had a C1 engineer review that and he agreed :)

Josef Isayo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 136
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #7 on: June 24, 2015, 11:07:11 am »

I am very sorry for the off topic, but is DPR processing the PhaseOne RAW files in LR? The image has that trademark Adobe complimentary blur filter look and none of the crispness that one sees in capture one pro.

I would hazard a guess that the difference would be a lot more pronounced if the Phase files are processed in C1P.


I am very sorry for the off topic, but is DPR processing the PhaseOne RAW files in LR? The image has that trademark Adobe complimentary blur filter look and none of the crispness that one sees in capture one pro.

I would hazard a guess that the difference would be a lot more pronounced if the Phase files are processed in C1P.

True, but the Canon would also benefit if it was a non filtered 5DsR which was shot between F/8-11 instead of F/16.

synn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1235
    • My fine art portfolio
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #8 on: June 24, 2015, 11:08:08 am »


In my view dpreview do not sharpen optimally in ACR/LR. I have before compared C1 and LR in terms of sharpening and they are pretty equal when LR has applied the right sharpening parameters. I even had a C1 engineer review that and he agreed :)


I would need to attend one of your workshops then, Hans. To the best of my abilities, I can't match C1P's sharpening in LR.
Anyway,  I digress.
Logged
my portfolio: www.sandeepmurali.com

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2102
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2015, 11:13:06 am »

I would need to attend one of your workshops then, Hans. To the best of my abilities, I can't match C1P's sharpening in LR.
Anyway,  I digress.

What a wonderful idea :) In these amazing landscapes you would forget all about sharpening.

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2102
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2015, 11:14:10 am »


True, but the Canon would also benefit if it was a non filtered 5DsR which was shot between F/8-11 instead of F/16.

The IQ180 was shot at f/8 and the Canon 5DsR shot was at f/5.6. Not sure where you got the idea about f/16...

Bart_van_der_Wolf

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8901
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2015, 11:42:20 am »

I am very sorry for the off topic, but is DPR processing the PhaseOne RAW files in LR? The image has that trademark Adobe complimentary blur filter look and none of the crispness that one sees in capture one pro.

I would hazard a guess that the difference would be a lot more pronounced if the Phase files are processed in C1P.

Hi Sandeep,

Not OT at all. The DPReview samples are (if I'm not mistaken, ACR processed). ACR is actually not that bad for these files but it can be better, and of course also depends on the sharpening and noise reduction settins used. You are right that (even with the preliminary support version of) the 5DS / 5DS R, Capture One Pro conversions looks pretty good. I used some of the Imaging-Resources Raws to test with.

I think that the 5DS (R) is most certainly geared at 'studio' use (just like the 1Ds Mark III), meaning controlled lighting, rather than action, low light, or video. But these cameras are so versatile that it depends more on the photographer than the location how they will be used. Bracketing can overcome much of the relatively limited (compared to the extreme Sony) Dynamic Range. The design choices for this camera clearly benefit slower, more studied, shooting scenarios. The supposedly denser Bayer CFA is a choice for color rather than speed, and the redesigned mirror mechanism benefits slower shutterspeeds more than high speed action speeds. Just to name a few.

As for the OPs question, hard to say if he should ditch his Phase gear. Those PO files are heavily calibrated per back and use lots of additional data before writing the 'Raw' data. So the files are relatively robust. The 5DS / 5DS R is an advanced consumer model (usually predates the coming of a new EOS 1 series model with similar specs). Canon just skipped the 5D3, and might go directly from 5D2 ->5DS or 1Ds3 ->1DS4 (?) as similar technologies.

Since the OP already is also a Canon shooter, the jump from 36 to 50MP may prove to be just what he needs for his output, with less aliasing and more resolution, even on the 5DS. The 5DS R would be a bit more sensitive than the 5DS to aliasing and false color artifacts, but maybe less than his PO. That depends on the lens and aperture range they are used in, and on the subject matter.

Cheers,
Bart
Logged
== If you do what you did, you'll get what you got. ==

Josef Isayo

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 136
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #12 on: June 24, 2015, 12:20:27 pm »

The IQ180 was shot at f/8 and the Canon 5DsR shot was at f/5.6. Not sure where you got the idea about f/16...

Hi Hans,

I was referring to Chris Chrisman's (dhdhdh) test of the 5Ds vs IQ160 above.

Doug Peterson

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4189
    • http://www.doug-peterson.com
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #13 on: June 24, 2015, 12:35:19 pm »

About the only thing these two cameras have in common is sensor resolution.

You didn't mention what body you're on with the p45+ but depending on the body there will be large changes in:

Lens look
Lens quality
Handling
Sync speed
ISO performance
Shooting speed
Tech cam options
View camera options
Etc

And of course tonality, color, and look/quantity of grain will be different.

ErikKaffehr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11310
    • Echophoto
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #14 on: June 24, 2015, 02:35:11 pm »

Hi,

My take on this is that I have a Sony A7rII on order. Why I chose this over a Canon 5Ds?

  • I am an old Minolta/Sony user with a lot of lenses
  • I am also a firm beliver in "mirrorless" being the future. Mirrorless cameras are far more flexible than SLRs.
  • I love live view

What I am shooting now is Sony SLT 99, a 24 MP camera in SLR size with EVF and a Hasselblad 555ELD with a P45+ back. Just to say, some frequent posters on this threads say I fail to make best of that equipment, using bad tools and may generally be incompetent. On the other hand, I have also posted quite a few raw images that inspired some other posters on this forums and over at GetDPI to buy into the Hasselblad system. Hasselblad lenses are all primes and I have been trough eight of them, while Sony lenses are mostly upper end zooms.

Those images are here: http://echophoto.dnsalias.net/ekr/Articles/Shoots/BernardSamples/

Just to say, I strongly feel that you need raw images to compare systems.

What I have seen comparing these systems is that I can make the files pretty similar. There is a resolution advantage of the P45+ that is pretty clear. On the other hand I would say that I see (absolutely) no difference in A2 size prints (something like 16" x 23"). Going up to A1 the difference is starting to be obvious. Using a 5X loupe on the A2 prints I can also observe differences. Eyesight obviously may matter.

Sony sensors have very low dark noise, and I certainly feel that there is a significant dark noise advantage to the Sony Alpha 99, but both systems are capable of very good images.

Now, the 5Ds has twice the MP of the Sony Alpha 99, so I would guess that it can match 39-60 MP backs if used with excellent lenses.

MF backs can be used with a wide variety of systems but so can the A7rII. The Canon 5Ds has also a shallow bayonet, so it can take Leica R and Nikon mount lenses.

A well known weakness of all Canons is the relatively high noise in the darks.

My take from all that is for one that I would think the Canon 5Ds is probably quite competitive with low end MFD.

As I said, my choice is the Sony Alpha 7rII, with at least one Canon T&S lens. But I will hang on to my P45+, too. I like shooting with that "Blad".

Best regards
Erik





Any thoughts about whether I should ditch my P45 in favor of the new Canon 50MP camera?  The 39MP Phase is a beautiful file, but I end up using the camera mostly in my studio as it's somewhat of a hassle to use on location.  And I'm a Canon shooter otherwise.

Any feedback from you pro's out there would be appreciated.

Thanks

DH
« Last Edit: June 24, 2015, 02:36:53 pm by ErikKaffehr »
Logged
Erik Kaffehr
 

BernardLanguillier

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13871
    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/bernardlanguillier/sets/
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2015, 05:33:47 pm »


In my view dpreview do not sharpen optimally in ACR/LR. I have before compared C1 and LR in terms of sharpening and they are pretty equal when LR has applied the right sharpening parameters. I even had a C1 engineer review that and he agreed :)

And both are significantly behind what Iridient Developper 3.03 is able to achieve if you are on Mac, especially if you use an AA filter less device and very sharp lenses.

Cheers,
Bernard

ACH DIGITAL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 612
    • http://www.achdigital.com
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2015, 05:41:54 pm »

I would need to attend one of your workshops then, Hans. To the best of my abilities, I can't match C1P's sharpening in LR.
Anyway,  I digress.

Synn try this I think is pretty close:

Logged
Antonio Chagin
www.achdigital.com

Hans Kruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2102
    • Hans Kruse Photography
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #17 on: June 24, 2015, 06:00:11 pm »

And both are significantly behind what Iridient Developper 3.03 is able to achieve if you are on Mac, especially if you use an AA filter less device and very sharp lenses.

Cheers,
Bernard


I have tried Irident Developper before and it does a good job on the details. Not sure though which parameters are optimal. From my cursory investigation I did not find much difference to Lightroom. The 5DsR files takes sharpening well similar to the D810 from working on the studio shots at dpreview. The parameters like amount=60, radius=0.7, detail=70 and masking=20 does a very good job in Lightroom and ACR. I use also a=50, r=0.8, d=70, m=30 as default on import and results are very similar. Maybe Irrident Developper has an edge, but for me it's small and I don't want to use a different RAW converter for very small differences.

dhdhdh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2015, 06:20:33 pm »

yes, good questions Doug.

I'm using the back on a Mamiya AFd
150mm mamiya macro lens for most work
and also a 45mm lens on occasion for out of the studio work.

some of my subject matter is very detailed still life, and clients have frequently asked for 50" prints.  The P45 looks good at that size, my old Canon 5D MK2 doesn't.

I'm thinking a 5Ds would look comparable at that print size and would also be easier to use on location.



About the only thing these two cameras have in common is sensor resolution.

You didn't mention what body you're on with the p45+ but depending on the body there will be large changes in:

Lens look
Lens quality
Handling
Sync speed
ISO performance
Shooting speed
Tech cam options
View camera options
Etc

And of course tonality, color, and look/quantity of grain will be different.
Logged

dhdhdh

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
Re: PhaseOne P45 vs Canon 5Ds
« Reply #19 on: June 25, 2015, 12:26:38 am »

Thank you Hans for your reply.

dhdhdh




The Canon 5Ds(R) is no more a studio camera than the 5D III, 1DX or Nikon D810, D4S etc.

The resolution of this camera goes head to head with the Phase One IQ250 (50MP), Pentax 645Z. See studio scene http://www.dpreview.com/previews/canon-eos-5ds-sr/5

The dynamic range is inferior to these other cameras. We will also see the Sony A7R II at 42MP as a contender soon.

The Sony A7R II has electronic first curtain as has Canon 5Ds(R) (in live view) which is important to avoid shutter shake (not to speak of mirror slap!). The Nikon D810 has this as well but awkwardly implemented.

The dynamic range is the weak spot of the Canon, however with an optimal exposure almost any single RAW file will do. The 5Ds(R) does not have the dreaded banding that the 5D III (and II) has. Besides that Lightroom now has an excellent HDR function for these cases where a single exposure is not enough (same for Sony and Nikon but more seldomly so).

What speaks for the Canon in spite of the DR weakness is the excellent glass that Canon has brought out in the recent years, presumable to prepare for a high resolution sensor.

I think the suggestion of renting one with the Canon glass you might want to use is a good idea.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up