Jump to content
seansrs968

Canon 5dS and 5DR

Recommended Posts

Would this cameras be ideal for UW? Say if you specialize in macro? Would love to hear others thoughts about these two cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the specs are interesting. Even more so that they will fit in the 5dIII housings that are already made. The fps isn't a big deal for macro or underwater for that matter. I would think that the biggest question you should ask, is are you planning on cropping a bunch or printing huge?

 

Dustin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that this level of resolution will be fine for macro, but hard to realise for supermacro (macro with wet dioptres, teleconverters etc), where results would probably be indistinguishable from the 5D 2 and 3.

 

In super macro shooting you need to stop the lens down (close the aperture a long way) to have any sort of depth of field. (Plus with a full frame camera filling the frame to the same degree as a crop sensor camera you would need to stop down further. This full frame supermacro picture, for example, was shot at f/40, yet still has very small depth of field: http://www.nhm.ac.uk/visit-us/wpy/gallery/2014/images/invertebrates/4852/you-have-been-warned.html)

 

From the tests I have done, diffraction will become significant at these pixel densities when shooting with the very small apertures required for supermacro.

 

As a guide look at the tests taken with a Nikon D7100 (24MP crop sensor):

AM_D7100_031.jpg

 

These are a comparison of 100% crops from macro photo, showing a progressive loss in detail and sharpness at the aperture is increased. At f/8 and f/11 the image is super sharp. At f/16 there is some loss in sharpness, but this is really insignificant for most uses and would mostly disappear with sharpening of the file. These are the apertures we use for normal macro. At f/22 and particularly f/32 and f/45 there is a significant loss in detail retained because of diffraction. This means that the superior number of pixels of the new camera is not actually of any use and a printed file would be indistinguishable from an older camera.

 

For more detail on my original tests you can read the details in the review on Wetpixel here: http://wetpixel.com/articles/field-review-nikon-d7100-and-subal-nd7100/P3

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hm, interesting point, thanks for explaining it, I wasn't really aware of that issue. So, what would be the perfect (or best) supermacro camera then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find that 'clarity of detail' on the 5D2 maximises at between f/11 and f/16 using the 100mm macro lens at 1:1. I find that f/16 starts to show a very marginal softening (although in the 'real world' images are still perfectly usable). As Alex shows smaller apertures show significant softening and super-macro will gain little from more MPixels. As a guesstimate, I'd suggest that 50MPixels on Full Frame will show a wider 'optimum aperture' for 'clarity of detail' of f/8 to f/11 even at 1:1 so the balance of depth of field versus detailed information will change and gains in detail will be offset by reduced depth of field. Until someone comes up with a fast auto-stacking camera we are at a bit of an impasse already IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Paul for your input - also very useful.

 

 

Hm, interesting point, thanks for explaining it, I wasn't really aware of that issue. So, what would be the perfect (or best) supermacro camera then?

 

I guess you'd want a great viewfinder, great AF (for when you are using it), and not too high pixel density and a relatively small body for getting into tight spots. The 1DX would meet all but the last one. The 7Dk2 - which I have not tried yet - might meet the second lot. It isn't as high res as the D7100 above - and therefore won't have as bad diffraction issues. But I have not tested it.

 

Most super macro shooters enjoy getting the shot without the need for cropping. If that is the case then a crop sensor camera is the way to go.

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am curiois as to when the resolving power of the L series lenses is impacted/overcome by pixel density. Charts by Alex are great examples. Often found "sweet spot" is different for different lenses, in terms of sharpness. Curious how various diopter brands also make a difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am curiois as to when the resolving power of the L series lenses is impacted/overcome by pixel density.

It is and isn't! More sampling (pixels) will provide more data which may be tonal or resolution. The interaction between the lens and pixel density is complex and you will find numerous internet discussions, arguments and a great deal of misinformation and lack of knowledge stated in defence of various apparently strongly held views.

 

I suspect that we already have cameras and lenses capable of results beyond those needed for the vast majority of images which are taken. When needed, today's highest MPixel cameras and 'best' lenses are extraordinarily capable - if used appropriately. 50MPixel cameras will no doubt yield measurably 'better' images, but whether the images will be obviously, visually better or simply marginally better will be an interesting question. For myself I see little point in going much beyond 25MPixels simply because I don't need to for the vast majority of images I take. [its a bit like driving a car capable of higher speeds than legal and/or roads allow. An interesting talking point, but unless you are going to race them on a track, somewhat irrelevant in general usage terms.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a very exciting comment from Tsunemasa Ohara, the Senior General Manager of Camera Research and Development at Canon Inc the man in charge of the 5ds & 5dsr's development "...existing EOS 5D Mark III body shell used for these cameras" and from Canon CPS-Europe : Compatible with most EOS 5D Mark III accessories (note: the WFT-E7 requires new USB cables and firmware updated)."

 

This means that the new 5ds and 5dsr should fit in existing 5dmk3 housings! =) Now to get some 44" wide media for my HP Z3100! Heh heh.

 

Cheers

 

Stu

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually asked Canon Germany that question (if the housings were the same), and the answer is, they don't know - no confirmation yet... would also be good to know their plans regarding the 5D4 - they'd sell a lot more if all the accessories were compatible, but so far, not many camera developers seems to understand that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe Darren Jew in Australia has had the 5Ds in the Nauticam 5DIII housing and it fits, as yes, it is the same body.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

since the 5ds/r has a crop mode of 1.3 (30+ MP) and 1.6 (20+ MP) and a pixel density the same as the 7D II it seems like filling the frame would be easier because a single macro lens could become 3 lenses. same goes for a wide prime lens. a canon 8-15 would give all kinds of options for filling the frame. it seems like one housing with 2 cameras, 5dIII and 5DS, would give you several options to chose from as long as the bodies are the same. im in the process of selling my 7D, lenses and housing so i can buy a housing for a 5dIII and the 5DS as long as it fits. Since the pixel density stays the same would the diffraction differ at differnet crops? which WA and macro lens would yall want?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have used the 5DS R for a whopping total of four dives. Compared to the 5D III, the 5DS R provides much more detail, IMHO. The Todd Winner review shows amazing detail, compared with previous cameras. One advantage of the 5DS R for macro is that you can shoot without a wet lens (diopter), resulting in a better depth of field than with a wet lens. Then crop. Resulting image is the same effective focal length, but with better DOF, and better sharpness and more detail. Focus is critically important with the 5DS R. I personally think the 5DS R is worth the extra money (compared to the 5D III), and is ideal for macro and WA photography as well. For me, it was like comparing a 1080p image to a 4K image. Astounding difference in detail!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just returned from a Trip to Lembeh using a Canon 5Ds R in my Aquatica housing (for the 5D MKIII) - The ergonomics of the 5Ds and MK III are the same. My first impressions - The camera does not perform as well in low light and I have found that I have to stop down the camera 2/3 - 1 stop relative to the Canon 5D MKIII, but obviously underwater this is not a huge issue with the right lighting. The other small thing I noticed is if you decided to shoot Auto WB then it seems to shoot slightly cooler than the MK III so it has required a few tweaks in Lightroom to warm a few images up. You do tend to find a slight increase in the noise especially in the dark areas. Additionally the camera is less forgiving when it comes to imperfections in focus. There were a number of shots that I believe I had nailed but when I got to the surface they were off. But when you nail the focus the results are absolutely breathtaking and gives you some room to crop when needed if you cannot get as close to the subject as you would like.

 

I shoot full manual. No auto focus with tweaks.

 

My set up is an aquatica 5D MKIII housing, 2x Sea & Sea Alpha 110 strobes, two focus lights, Nauticam Carbon Fiber float arms, Macromate Doubler, Canon 100mm Macro lens. Overall I am very happy with the camera. If it was something you wanted to use both above and below water then you may find you get better overall performance from your MK III unless you have a well lit scene or studio lighting. Hope this helps.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there any further reports and experiences of using the Canon 5DS and/or the 5DSR underwater please? I am planning some changes to my gear and this is a possibility but there is a dearth of information about its performance underwater.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is my grain of salt:

www.uwaterphoto.com/?p=82

Edited by jordi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the 1 got cut off in your link jordi.

 

www.uwaterphoto.com/?p=821

Edited by DavidSD619

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...