Canon 5DS and 5DS R

[rpm]

I remember thinking how cool my 12MP Canon was when I bought it. Now 50 megapixels. 50! 

Just look at the detail:

Not bad, huh... Enhance!


Wow. I can only imagine the detail it will pick up in outdoor shots. The 5DS and 5DS R will be available starting in June 2015 with price tags of $3,699 and $3,899, respectively.

Get the full story at Petapixel.

[saggs]

Calm down, more pixels does not automatically a better camera make, or even a better sensor.  How about the color fidelity? the dynamic range? the high ISO?  And what's the framerate when the onboard processor has to write files that big? (definitely not gonna be an action camera) And can your computer handle processing files that big?  Will this sensor have the 'banding' issues that plagued the previous 5d sensors?

With that pixel pitch I'd worry about some detail being lost to diffraction limitation at tighter apertures even with the very best lenses, so don't stop down to far in those outdoor shots, and with 50mp, you'd better have a very good tripod and use mirror lockup or you'll pick up motion blur.  No doubt thousands of facebook wanna be "pros" will buy it without a clue how to use it, and wonder why all their pictures don't look any better then they did with a Rebel.   I suppose 50 or even 60mp might work OK on a 36mm sensor (no way in an APS-C sensor) but anything more then that and you'd better go to medium format, and a used  Pentax 645D can be had for not much more then the new 5ds.  I've been tempted to get one myself since I could use my old 67 lenses on it which have just been collecting dust for years since local 120 E-6 processing went extinct.   Also I see Canon has followed Nikon's example of charging more for the version without an AA filter then the one with it.   I still don't understand how less can cost more.

Meanwhile as a longtime A-mount user (since 1990ish) I'm still stuck wondering if Sony will ever build a worthy replacement for my beloved A900, or if I should just buy another A900 for whenever this one dies.

Not to rain on your parade, I'm sure it's fine, fine tool.  I just don't get that excited about new cameras these days though.  The lens will always be the biggest factor when it comes to image quality and most serious photographers have 5 times as much money invested in lenses as they do cameras, and unlike camera bodies today, lenses don't get superseded by a better model every year.  In today's photography world, bodies come and go, lenses are forever.

[rpm]

Whoa there Kimosabe. You're not raining on my parade. I'll never drop that kind of cash on a camera. But 50MP is quite impressive none the less.

[MrRiplEy[H]]

She won't be happy that you zoomed to her zits she carefully tried to cover with makeup.

[Rich46yo]

Yeah you'll be doing an awful lot of smoothing in PS.

To be honest I miss the look of film. We still have an old type neighborhood theater I still like to go to when I crave the look of actual film. Even the pop corn tastes like it did when I was a kid.

But yes technology has transformed photography and videomaking.

[saggs]

In a fit of boredom I went over and scanned some of the Canon threads at Dpreview.

Seems to me that even among the Canon faithful this new 5DS is going to flop badly.  The general sentiment among them is that Canon missed the memo that the megapixel war among camera makers ended 5 years ago, and the current war is the high ISO/low light performance war, and to a lesser extend dynamic range and HD video... all of which the 5DS do poorly (relative to other recent releases from their competitors) in order to win the MP war which nobody cares about any more.

To me it just feels like a total gimmicky move by Canon.  Anywhere in the 24-36mp range would keep them competitive resolution wise with Sony and Nikon (actually just Sony since they make the 36mp sensor for Nikon as well as themselves).  Instead they go for the big MP headline while sacrificing ISO/low light performance, framerate, video and dynamic range.  And few photographers with that kind of money to spend will fall for that gimmick.

As far as resolution goes.  I've done several 30"x40" prints from my 5 yr old 24mp sensor without lacking for resolution, and even prints from my lowly 12mp sensor look fantastic up to 20x30"  The thing that super-ninja-pixel-peepers on the interweb forget when they blow up an image on their computer screen to 500% and gloriously point out a fuzzy pixel on that blade of grass in the corner of the frame... ... is that large gallery sized prints are not viewed from 2 inches away with a 15x magnifying glass.

Honestly, I think for most photographers all 50mp on a 35mm sensor is going to achieve is to find the diffraction limits of their lenses, and show off (via motion blur) any weakness in their technique.  I still say if you want or need that kind of resolution you need to go to medium format.

[saggs]

Yeah you'll be doing an awful lot of smoothing in PS.

That is if you have the computer to handle files that huge.  My system is not top of the line, but it's not cheap crap either, and I can kill it if I try to move to fast, or do too many things at once with 24mp files.  With 50mp RAW files your gonna need a top of the line computer.

To be honest I miss the look of film. We still have an old type neighborhood theater I still like to go to when I crave the look of actual film. Even the pop corn tastes like it did when I was a kid.

I know what you mean.  I'd still be shooting landscapes on Velvia 50 if only there was a local place to process it.  I've got a Pentax 6x7 with several fantastic lenses just collecting dust now, but I haven't had the heart to sell them.  For me I've not seen anything digital that can match the vibrant color and dynamic range of 120 Velvia.  (not to mention 6x7 film still crushes ANY dslr when it comes to resolution)