Here's the second part of that test, that I forgot to mention in detail, about the noise over time due to long exposures: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-qJyr023aJTk.html
Thanks for that test. I'm also still waiting for proper skies and will soon head into the mountains for some night photography. Till now I was confined to the office with my tests most of the time. I did some hot pixel tests with very long exposures (several Minutes) and found there the R5 is not very good. But I'm thankful that you didn't notice the heat problem with timelapses and multiple shots of medium exposure time. BTW: My R5 does not release the shutter when I am in the interval mode? Did you use the Interval on the camera or an external trigger? Just curious. cheers
I have both the 5D Mark IV (which I love) and a new R5. I also have an iOptron SkyGuider Pro tracker. If you were going out to shoot Milkyway with the tracker and a 14mm f2.8 Rokinon lens and could only take one camera, which would it be? My 5D4 has a Battery Grip for extra batteries but my R5 doesn't, if that would make a difference.
Okay, so that was my bad. (This might be a long answer). So I'll fix the title and put up another quick video about that specifically. Basically, yes I did test that, but for some reason, in typical Adobe fashion, Premiere was giving me hell rendering out this video yesterday. I spent 8 hours and tried fixing it like 47 times before I got it rendered. During that time I had to keep cutting parts out and I realize now that was one of those parts. I guess I just got so scatter-brained and frustrated with the render that I didn't do a good final watch through. Anyways, I'll post another video here soon, but basically I took the first and last image from the almost 2 hour long astrolapse and compared them and saw no increase in noise, so again not the most scientific experiment, but from my experience so far, it's not an issue. At least it wasn't an issue for me because it never got hot enough for there to be a perceptible increase in the noise.
@@BrentHall no worries... I thought I missed it but skipping through it again I couldn't find it ;-) Good to know it doesn't make a difference. However, I'm not sure this is an entirely good thing as the sensors are always at 30°C or so, I wished they could cool them with a peltier element or so but this wouldn't fit the compact package
FYI the 500 was created in time of low resolution sensors (eg 18MP). If you want pin sharp, it's more around 300 rule ;) You have an actual equation but that's the idea
Great, thanks Brent. So, was your conclusion, albeit subjective and unscientific , that the R5 high ISO performance was slightly better than for the 5D (I think I recall someone from Canon Saying the improvement was around a stop)? Also, you mentioned briefly that you were not getting any overheating of the R5 during long time lapses. Is that still your experience?
I do think that it's a little better so far, though I don't think I'd say it was a full stop better. Idk though, I haven't tested it enough to really say that yet. Yeah, I saw no increase in noise from the beginning to the end of the timelapse, so it didn't heat up enough to have a perceptible increase in noise.
Hey man, have you (or could you) post the 17 RAW files and any dark files you got for that 45mm shot so we can play with them as well? I'd love to see that in person and run it through my own processing routine to see how the resulting file holds up
Hi Brent, Thank you for the video. I was wondering, did you make a video on the editing of the final result you got with this image (from the raw stacked to the crisp clear final edited image) ? Thank you for your time.
I didn't do one for that image, but I did a full edit video for the green and chai tea channel memberships for the image I took in the next video, which is a very similar milky way image with a focus stacked foreground.
the noise looks VERY similar, not like much progress either. I would be interested to see the same image size (downscale R5 image to 5D4 size) and then compare noise.
Yeah, it does look similar to me too, but I don't think that's a bad thing, as I've always been happy with the 5D4 noise, comparatively speaking. At least, to me, it's not bad, and there's no banding in the shadows or horrible color noise. I thought about scaling the R5 image down, but I felt like that would introduce more sharpening so I didn't do it.
@@BrentHall thanks, really good to know. I shoot concerts and was waiting for a stabilized 85mm out of Canon. Gave up and got the Tamron, and ended up getting 4 more.
Thanks a lot for your video, Brent! Are you going to test the R6 with astrophotography too? I‘m thinking about buying the R6 for daily use, but also for astrophotography, since NEOWISE made me really interested in stuff like this. I really would appreciate your advise, because I‘m struggling between the Sony A7iii and the R6. Greetings from germany!
Hey Phil, thanks for the kind words, I'm glad the video helped! I'll definitely be testing the R6 as well. I'm hoping my pre-order should be here on the 31st, so not much longer now. I'll probably test it against the R5 for astro stuff as well as on it's own. Don't have any Sonys though, so I couldn't say how it'll do against that.
Wow, thanks for the fast response! I didn‘t expected an answer THAT early! That sounds good. I‘m definitely waiting for that video with great pleasure. I‘ve thought about the R5 too, but since I‘m not interested in 8K and the price tag is more than 2k€ more than the R6, I‘m going to take either the A7iii or the R6 (and I‘ve read, that fewer megapixels (in comparison to the 45MP with the R5) shouldn‘t be a cons for astrophotography. No, it should be a pro because of reduced image noise, but hey, that‘s only the theory). I‘ll be looking for that video and now you got a new follower!
You bet man! I try to answer everyone's comments, well all the legit ones anyway, and definitely the quality ones (like yours). Yeah, in theory the R6 should possibly have slightly better high iso performance than the R5, but so far my R5 has been quite good with low light, so we'll see. But like you said, if you don't need all those megapixels then the R6 will probably do it for most people, as I'm pretty sure it shares the same sensor as the 1DX3, which is great. Also, I appreciate the kind words and the sub!
I've only done one tracked shot since I got the R5 and R6. It came out nice, but I don't recall any better color detail. Hopefully I'll do some more soon, with my new telescope.
I find the colour data at high iso’s gets a bit washed out. My suspicion is that sensor gain boosts luminance sensitivity in a way that isn't unparalleled in colour data (especially red within the bayer pattern) . Nonetheless, I am excited to try some shots when the skies clear. Happy shooting and wishing you clear skies wherever you are.
Hmm, I could possibly get behind that. I'm definitely looking forward to getting my new telescope set up and doing some better images with the R5 and R6 on it. I pretty much always have clear skies here in sw New Mexico. 😁
This video was shot about 15 minutes from my house, just outside Silver City. Idk if I have a favorite place in NM for astro, there's so many! I guess I do really like the Gila and the cosmic campground. I also really like City of rocks and rockhound state parks for astro. I have many videos and astro images from those places.
You just have to get away from light pollution. I'm lucky to live in the mountains in sw New Mexico where there are very few people and some of the darkest skies in the country.
Hi Brent, i have the R5 and the 5DM4, too. At the moment i shoot with der R5 with RAW and JPEG parallel. In my opinion the JPGs are cleaner at higher ISO (no noise reduction in R5) than the DNG file. You can test it. DNG is at the moment not the best for the R5.
Brent Hall I dont now why, normaly i work only with RAW, but at begin test it with JPGs, because the DNG files are not very well of the Beta Converter 12.4 beta.
