From Canon 5D2 to 4 or R or 5 or Sony ?

[DP]

If you need 50MP then buy an X1D

why buy H when there is Fuji MF dSLMs ?

[kevs]

thanks DP, yeah leaning toward the 4 or waiting. My buddy, bought the R and loves it, but I like most, don't want intro versions.
I just posted about grey market coincidentally (more for a lens), and everyone says stay away like plague:

https://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=127941.0

[BernardLanguillier]

I mainly photograph wildlife, and I have the native 100-400 for each.  It's been my experience that the AF is quicker and more accurate with the Canon combo than the Sony combo.  The Sony hunts much more than the Canon which means missed shots.  I like the way I can customize the Sony so I can make adjustments quickly; 10 fps; silent shooting, and I like the bigger files, but all of this means nothing if I miss the shot.

I see, thanks.

I realize that I am glad to have the best of both worlds in a single camera with the D850.

Add a 500mm f5.6 PF and you’ll be close to perfection for wild life.

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1573142

Cheers,
Bernard

[charles.woodrich]

I see, thanks.

I realize that I am glad to have the best of both worlds in a single camera with the D850.

Add a 500mm f5.6 PF and you’ll be close to perfection for wild life.

Cheers,
Bernard

I hear that's great body for BIF.  Unfortunately I'm pretty locked into the Canon line.  If things aren't moving too quickly I like to use my Canon 600V2 with either a 1.4 or 2.0 TC with a Sigma adapter on the a7R3.  The results can be quite impressive.

[kevs]

Bernard, 850 does seem to hit all points. Odd that Canon would not put a 40-50 sensor in the mark 4, no?.

Why need for Sony then? oh.. mirrorless.

Still I would just have Nikon... two systems, bit much to maintain.
I was Nikon 10 years, but they, for some reason, took 6 years to get full frame...  (now back roaring-- after losing 90% of photographers who were with them)

Still think Canon/Nikon have best controls/ menus, as they go so far back with photographers. 

[BernardLanguillier]

Bernard, 850 does seem to hit all points. Odd that Canon would not put a 40-50 sensor in the mark 4, no?.

Why need for Sony then? oh.. mirrorless.

Still I would just have Nikon... two systems, bit much to maintain.
I was Nikon 10 years, but they, for some reason, took 6 years to get full frame...  (now back roaring-- after losing 90% of photographers who were with them)

Nikon has been back roaring since the D3 in 2008 and has never looked back. it’s been 10 years of image quality and AF leadership.

Canon has demonstrated time and again that they don’t have the sensor technology. The 5DIV is the first decent sensor but it is still about 3-4 years behind Sony/Nikon tech. Less DR with 2/3rd the resolution. Probably good enough if you are a good enough kind of person for your camera Equipment.

Yes, shooting skills are more important.

The Sony a7rIII is a great camera that shows the promise of mirrorless with competitive AF but still isn’t at D850 level for tracking/moving subjects. The D5 is still another level up and its consistency with the right lens sometimes approaches black magic. The D6 will end the line and is rumored to be released in the coming months btw.

Cheers,
Bernard

[kevs]

Bernard, where did Nikon go for the years of full frame?  I had to sell all my Nikon lenses (only time switched systems),

and now I'm stuck with Canon!  (but going to stay Canon...)

What was the deal with Nikon then?  What was that 5-6 years no full frame?  (A Canon rep said is was because Canon had lots more money from printers, copiers to invest forsee the digital revolution coming).. still 5-6 years was it? Bit long/ crazy no?

And 90% of Pros were on Nikon, most went to Canon.

I would have fully preferred to have stayed with Nikon. Too late now..

[BernardLanguillier]

Your loss my friend.

Buy if Canon’s cameras are not limiting your photography there is nothing to worry about really.

Now, you seems to be willing to replace your 5DmkII by something better, I assume it means you are finding some possible areas of improvement?

The question simply is whether you are convinced that Canon is the best provider of equipment for you in the coming years. If you are then why look elsewhere indeed.

Factually, they have been being Nikon in the DSLR segment for 10 years and Sony is overtaking them quickly with their great mirrorless offering. What are the odds this trend changes moving forward is the relevant question.

Cheers,
Bernard

[kevs]

I saw the eye focus of the Canon R in a store today. Very impressive. The Mark 4 focus points are  easier to move around than the mark 2, but wow the R kills it on that point. It's probably same as Sony eye with different name. 

Almost leaning to the Canon R, but then just read this:    So maybe I'll wait the 6-12 months... not sure... it will probably be a bit more than the $2300 of the R!  Thanks all, appreciate info getting here

https://www.canonrumors.co/canon-eos-5ds-r-will-be-replaced-by-75-mp-canon-eos-r-body/

[BobShaw]

Thanks Bob, what mean, "50MP is beyond the sweet spot for 35mm"..... does not print like a true 50mb that a medium format Phase One might?

For fine art --even people in the shots -- you cannot have enough if you want to print 70 inches on one side. But yeah, for headshots, 20 is great, so depends.

I mean that my experience at least was that high MP 35mm cameras introduce a whole new range of issues. The pixels are so close together that any movement or lens limitation is magnified. In that regard a DSLR is like a steam engine with a mirror flapping up and down and a shutter moving right next to the sensor plane. That seems to be the experience of a lot of people with 50MP 35mm cameras. Bolt them to a building.

I agree that you often need more MP which is why I bought the 5Ds, but as I said, if you need more MP then buy the X1D. (It wasn't out at the time I bought the 5Ds.) No moving parts in the camera and leaf shutter for virtually no movement there. My experience with an old H3D was similar. More MP than about 20MP requires a bigger sensor.

[BernardLanguillier]

If the is the case, I don’t know how I managed to shoot thousands of images last month, many of them on a moving sailing boat, without seing any camera induced blur using a D850, 24-70mm f2.8 E VR, 70-200 f2,8 E? That was without using any form of electrical shutter btw.

The answer is simple: not all shutter/mirror mechanisms are built equal and you need a sufficiently high shutter speed. I believe that VR (be it in lenses or in body) also helps to a certain extend.

So, although I agree that leaf shutters are great for low vibration (I have owned an H6D-100c for 2 years) it is absolutely not true that high res DSLRs can’t be shot handheld with very sharp results, even with ultra-sharp lenses.

Cheers,
Bernard

[kevs]

Thanks Bernard, for confirmation, as I have no plans to spend 10k plus new lenses for a new Hassy Body.

(if I was super rich I'd get the Phase One IQ)

Your 45 mb Nikon 850s I'm sure are doing just fine handheld... at 125 sec shutter, my guess.

Of course Bob could be right,  but but I would doubt Canon/ Nikon would make equipment rated at high pixels if it was no Kosher.

[BernardLanguillier]

Thanks Bernard, for confirmation, as I have no plans to spend 10k plus new lenses for a new Hassy Body.

(if I was super rich I'd get the Phase One IQ)

Your 45 mb Nikon 850s I'm sure are doing just fine handheld... at 125 sec shutter, my guess.

Of course Bob could be right,  but but I would doubt Canon/ Nikon would make equipment rated at high pixels if it was no Kosher.

My rule of thumb is at least twice the inverse of the focal length.

But again, not all shutters/mirrorboxes are designed equally well.

Cheers,
Bernard

[kevs]

"My rule of thumb is at least twice the inverse of the focal length."

Thanks what does mean?  Focal length has an impact on pixel size shoot? Lost there.

[BernardLanguillier]

"My rule of thumb is at least twice the inverse of the focal length."

Thanks what does mean?  Focal length has an impact on pixel size shoot? Lost there.

A given amount of hand shake/shutter shake will cause the projection on the sensor of an ideally point element to spread over a larger area during the time of exposure.

The longer the focal length the wider the area, which is why we use faster shutter speeds for longer focal length.

Cheers,
Bernard

[BobShaw]

As I said in the original post, the 5Ds is great in good light, which means fast shutter speeds. Low light though means low shutter speeds and higher ISO and I doubt any high MP 35mm camera will produce images to make good big (like 70") prints. Electronic shutters are no use for moving subjects either.

In terms of price, if people are talking $10,000 and mean USD then they appear to be way out.
I bought my X1D as a demo for $7600 AUD or about $5000USD. That is less than a top end Canon or Nikon. So if you have the need spend the money. In photography buy cheap, buy thrice.

[sbay]

The pixels are so close together that any movement or lens limitation is magnified. In that regard a DSLR is like a steam engine with a mirror flapping up and down and a shutter moving right next to the sensor plane. That seems to be the experience of a lot of people with 50MP 35mm cameras. Bolt them to a building.

I found that shooting with electronic first shutter curtain (also possible on DSLR in live view), I can get away with ridiculously unstable support situations and end up with extremely sharp images as long as it's not windy. Although I'm willing to carry a heavy tripod (gitzo 3series systemic with bh-55) I often get into less than optimal support situations for various reasons (need a lighter tripod for a hike, need to raise the center column all the way, ground is spongy etc) in these cases EFSC is a godsend.

[kevs]

Bob, thanks, good info. Well, 5k is a deal when consider Phase Q which are gold standard are what 40k?  And fine art shooters buy them.

For most 5k is a lot, then have to get lenses, but I'll hold onto this info. What you are saying (new to me) is that even though Nikon, Canon are advertising large MP (45, 50 etc) because of the 35 mm shutters, super large prints wont look as good as equivalent prints made from a medium format leaf camera?

( I would have thought it's because of the bigger sensor, never knew about shutter variable)

SBay, thanks too.... this is new info for me as well, . assuming you have a 35mm mirrorless?... Is what you are saying tied to image stabilization?  I'm debating of getting the Canon R in Janurary, or.. waiting for a newer version, as I think the Canon R, being the first does  version, not have camera stabilization if my research is correct.  Of course, no camera I've ever owned has had that I think.

[BobShaw]

... What you are saying (new to me) is that even though Nikon, Canon are advertising large MP (45, 50 etc) because of the 35 mm shutters, super large prints wont look as good as equivalent prints made from a medium format leaf camera?
( I would have thought it's because of the bigger sensor, never knew about shutter variable)

The sensor size trumps anything else. For any given size print you need to magnify less for a larger sensor. To make a 360mm x 240mm print from a 36x24mm sensor you need to magnify 10 times in each direction or make each imperfection 100 times bigger. Noise and vibration are also more apparent. Larger sensors are better for larger prints.

The leaf shutters reduce vibration because they are internal to the lens and travel a short distance, where the light rays cross. A focal plane shutter travels the entire size of the sensor during the exposure. A small difference perhaps but massive if you use flash.

Consumer electronics makers make things that people want. People want bigger numbers and more widgets.

[sbay]

\SBay, thanks too.... this is new info for me as well, . assuming you have a 35mm mirrorless?... Is what you are saying tied to image stabilization?  I'm debating of getting the Canon R in Janurary, or.. waiting for a newer version, as I think the Canon R, being the first does  version, not have camera stabilization if my research is correct.  Of course, no camera I've ever owned has had that I think.

No it's not related to image stabilization other than it's another technique to help sharpness. See following link for a better explanation

https://photographylife.com/what-is-electronic-front-curtain-shutter