Soldato
Canon EOS 5DS, 5DS R & EF 11-24mm f/4L
- Thread starter olv
- Start date
I believe when the manufacturers state the the buffer size it explicitly excludes the fact that that files will be written to the card and can be erased during the burst. this way it excludes differences in card speed
Yeah, but the Nikon 810 is only a 36mp camera not a 50mp one
I do have to wonder however at the mentality of that Photographer who thought he could get away with using a slow CF card with a camera which has a 50MP sensor.
Saw this earlier -a short interview with Tsunemasa Ohara Senior General Manager of Camera Research and Development at Canon. I had to laugh at his refreshing honesty as to why the 5DS and 5DR doesn't have a headphone socket
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/interviews/developing_eos_5ds_and_eos_5ds_r.do
Yeah, but the Nikon 810 is only a 36mp camera not a 50mp one
I do have to wonder however at the mentality of that Photographer who thought he could get away with using a slow CF card with a camera which has a 50MP sensor.
Saw this earlier -a short interview with Tsunemasa Ohara Senior General Manager of Camera Research and Development at Canon. I had to laugh at his refreshing honesty as to why the 5DS and 5DR doesn't have a headphone socket
http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/interviews/developing_eos_5ds_and_eos_5ds_r.do
The resolution difference might be an explanation of technical deficiency but it doesn't give what some customers would want. Half the buffer size for 18% more linear resolution is not a great trade-off.
i don't think it matters for the most part for most users but one of the things these high pixel density cameras are great for is wildlife and sports getting you more pixels on the subject and ultimately more detail. A longer burst is
very useful for birds-in-flight etc.
The buffer is likely 750Mb in this cameras, I don;t think it would cost much to bump that up to 1.5Gb to match the Nikon D810, if for nothing else make the spec sheets comparable.
Associate
June
If that was the case then they wouldn't specify a card speed (class) requirement with the buffer speed spec.
I got to play with these (the 5Ds and 11-24) at London Fashion Week today. Gonna pop a card in tomorrow so I can have a look at the files on my laptop. The 11-24mm is a very fun lens. Tempted to switch to Canon for the lenses/control wheels (borrowed a 5DIII and a 70-300L for the day) but there are a few things I still like about Nikon's controls.
Just seen this, you are probably right.
Associate
Soldato
Mate of mine has one too and said dont bother if your looking for a high DR that rivals a nikon/sony.
Says its good for only Studio/controlled light conditions and if your coming from a 5d3, pointless upgrade
Says its good for only Studio/controlled light conditions and if your coming from a 5d3, pointless upgrade
Associate
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 1,303
From my experience the biggest issue we are hitting now is not the censors MP however the lenses resolvable resolution. Even the latest and greatest Lenses from Ziess will give around 32mp, a 38mp sensor gives around 26mp, 20mp sensor gives around 17mp. As the sensors resolution increases the resolving ability of the lenses exponentially decreases in comparison.
Rough numbers given above, and you will likely never be able to get 1:1 accuracy. However the point is lens tech has not kept up not with other technology.
You will get more resolvable megapixels from the new camera, however it's not as clean cut as the plain numbers make out.
It's not just lenses that are the problem. Any movement at higher resolutions starts to become more of a problem. So stability, faster shutter times, shutter shake, all need to be taken care of to ensure a sharp image is maintained.
I'm finding SLR is hitting it's limits, mirror-less systems will be required to obtain 50mp+ with superior resolving sensors & combinations of real-time image stacking/pixel shift type technologies to obtain the increases.
For now, imo it's best to make do with what we have and await/save for the real upcoming tech advances. I hate to admit however as much as I have grown nostalgic to my SLR semi mechanical cameras, I fear the days are numbered. It's inevitable that real digital shall take over I hope it's soon.
All that said, I'm severely resolution restricted & would love a 5ds array. The cost .. .
Rough numbers given above, and you will likely never be able to get 1:1 accuracy. However the point is lens tech has not kept up not with other technology.
You will get more resolvable megapixels from the new camera, however it's not as clean cut as the plain numbers make out.
It's not just lenses that are the problem. Any movement at higher resolutions starts to become more of a problem. So stability, faster shutter times, shutter shake, all need to be taken care of to ensure a sharp image is maintained.
I'm finding SLR is hitting it's limits, mirror-less systems will be required to obtain 50mp+ with superior resolving sensors & combinations of real-time image stacking/pixel shift type technologies to obtain the increases.
For now, imo it's best to make do with what we have and await/save for the real upcoming tech advances. I hate to admit however as much as I have grown nostalgic to my SLR semi mechanical cameras, I fear the days are numbered. It's inevitable that real digital shall take over I hope it's soon.
All that said, I'm severely resolution restricted & would love a 5ds array
. The cost .. .There is more to it than the pure resolution though. As the pixel density increases you effectively oversample the analogue signal which is important because to reproduce an analogue signals you need to sample at over twice the Nyquist limit. That is if the lens can resolve 20MP then you will need a sensor with twice the linear resolution, so 80Mp in order to reach the limit of the lens (and you will want to downsample back to 20MP in post).
Moreover, due to the color filter array there are even more advantages of sampling at a higher frequency.
Which is exactly why we see smaller sensor cameras with far higher pixel densities still not reach a diffraction limit when used wide open, even with fairly mediocre glass.
And don't get confused by the DXOmakr MP ratings of lenses because that compeltely ignores what the lens is actually capable of resolving. E.g., the lens could could 100MP over the central portion but the softer edges might only be able to resolve at something like 10MP. DXO will will report a number that is an average of that.
Even if the lens was perfectly uniform and DXO said it was 20MP, all things being equal an 80MP sensor will give a better final image than a 40MP sensor which would be better than a 20MP, despite the lens being limited to 20MP, precisely for the reasons outlined above.
Moreover, due to the color filter array there are even more advantages of sampling at a higher frequency.
Which is exactly why we see smaller sensor cameras with far higher pixel densities still not reach a diffraction limit when used wide open, even with fairly mediocre glass.
And don't get confused by the DXOmakr MP ratings of lenses because that compeltely ignores what the lens is actually capable of resolving. E.g., the lens could could 100MP over the central portion but the softer edges might only be able to resolve at something like 10MP. DXO will will report a number that is an average of that.
Even if the lens was perfectly uniform and DXO said it was 20MP, all things being equal an 80MP sensor will give a better final image than a 40MP sensor which would be better than a 20MP, despite the lens being limited to 20MP, precisely for the reasons outlined above.