Discover unlimited Magazines & Newspapers all in one app Click the link below and start your free 6-week trial readly.me/garygough21 tinyurl.com/cndrbz8e
Every single person looking at upgrading/changing cameras should listen carefully to your summary and apply your thought process. Nailed it when you stressed the type of photography you do and intend to use the new camera for. Horses for courses, it really is as simple as that but often we find it difficult to ignore the noise of sales hype. One point I'd like to make about when you pushed the files from under North Pier, whilst I accept there is no way under normal shooting situations we would ever push a single fie that far there is a certain degree of reassurance in knowing you CAN, it gives confidence in the kit you are using and this should not be underestimated. I have recently bought a Nikon D850 to replace the Nikon D750 and the increased dynamic range really blew me away, will I ever use it? highly unlikely as a landscape photographer, was it comforting to know I could? As a hobbyist, yes. Thank you for another superb real-life test, you really did put so much into this one.
Great video Gary. I was able to grab a lightly used 5DSR with only 4,000 shots on it for $1k when people were unloading them last year to fund R5 purchases. I could not be happier and use it extensively for all of my photography videos. The fact that the 5DSR and R5 200% images are identical is remarkable.
Apart from the obvious bells and whistles on the R5 and R6, I have found some unexpected benefits of going mirrorless. As an older photographer I found myself struggling with carrying the weight of the 5dmk4 and tripod. The R6 is lighter and IBIS allows me to use lower shutter speeds without always having to lug the tripod. Additionally, setting all the parameters so that I can control them whilst looking through the viewfinder means I don't have to keep taking my glasses on and off - I can control and review images through the view finder. It doesn't sound much but I have found it has really helped me to enjoy my photography again.
@@GaryGough I am with you there BUT.... I found out a new pair of glasses that allows me to see far away as well as short distance without having to take them off are about $300. This is far less expensive than a $4000 upgrade just for that feature. But yes, I am taking my glasses off every 2 minutes until my new pair of glasses arrive on the mail and it is extra annoying. :-) By the way, your video is by far the best ever made on that topic and trust me, I have watched them all.
A sincere opinion from a sincere man. Words of wisdom from a real, not just a youtuber, pro photographer. People, please forget the pixel spotting forever. I don't want to recall now the words the great Ansel Adams said. Please go outside and enjoy photography with whatever camera you can afford! Thank you very much, Gary. You are an inspiration. All the best.
Good video. I do landscape and bird photography as well as some event photography. I have owned a 5DSr for several years. I also had a 5D MK IV which I traded for an R6. I agree that the 5DSr still does a remarkable job when hi-res is needed. The R6 is good for the other times. Your findings confirmed my experience.
I moved up the the Canon 5DSR in 2016 from my older 5DMk2. The 5DSR is a superb camera and I'm completely satisfied with the image quality. I only shoot Landscapes and can compensate for some shortfall in dynamic range by exposure bracketing & using graduated filters.... simple. The arguments around the mirrorless camera world is weight, that is quite ridiculous indeed! Put the Canon f2.8 70 - 200 USM Mk2 on the either body and its going to be heavy, the glass is heavy, high quality. Good glass & 50 million pixels you get a sharp image if you do all the other things needed: stable camera, appropriate shutter speed, focus correctly. The next Canon Camera that has 100meg sensor & medium format sensor, then I'll consider a change....maybe LOL!
5dsr is stunning camera. I brought a second hand one a couple of years back, unfortunately I made the mistake of selling it and buying a Nikon d850. The d850 is a great camera too but outside of the dynamic range I prefer the Canon system, all the Canon L glass I used was noticeably sharper than the Nikon equivalent especially corner performance.
Thanks Gary, a great test and very interesting. I upgraded from a 5DII to the R, and apart from the obvious advantages of mirrorless, I'm not so sure that image quality actually improved. Sure, you get an extra 10Mp, but for landscape photography there is no call for heavy cropping. I didn't do any side-by-side comparisons, but I think, looking at my old landscape images with large texture variation, that the 5DII may have slightly better colour saturation. For action (birds) I still use my trusty old 7DII, and yes, the R5 would be fantastic, but as an armature, it's far too expensive, so am waiting for an R7. Great show.
Loved the comparison and I think you have explained in much depth with very good proof. Also allowing members to download the files and see for themselves is also another bonus. Once again forever grateful of the knowledge, experience and content you share with us every week. Richie. X
Gary I can't tell you how much this video means to me! I am in this exact moment trying to decide between these 2 cameras. I agree with you 110%! I'm transitioning from a portrait to Landscape/Architectural photography. I'll be retiring in a few years and I am purchasing my last camera. Seeing these photos and comparing them, I have no need to go with the R5. The 5DSr is the camera for me. Thank you very much for this video! Your photography inspires me to push further into my craft and achieve these types of photographs on my own. Bravo Mr. Gough!
Now it's 2023 and the 5dsr can be had used for $1000 in excellent condition. The R5 is about $3000 new. For 1/3 the cost it's got me thinking about picking up the 5Dsr. What does everyone else think?
Great video as always! Just a note on file size - they're varying so much due to what's actually in the frame - the more complex a scene is the higher the file size will be. If you fill the frame with a white sheet of paper followed by filling it with grass on your lawn, the lawn shot will have a considerably bigger file size due to the fact there's more detail in the image and thus more information needs to be stored in the file. File size even changes with ISO - the higher the ISO the larger the file size, this is because the noise itself in high ISO images needs to be stored within the file. You can see the effect of this if you look at the counter telling you how many images you have left on your card, as you increase ISO you'll see that number drop. Love your channel, your enthusiasm has certainly inspired me to keep going out with my camera over the last incredibly difficult 13 months so thank you for your efforts!
First off Mk3 Canadian Landscape photographer that just got a 5Dsr a year back. I waited for years for the prices to come down on the camera that has become my workhorse. I LOVE THE THING! Your video was very timely and it helped me see the value of my present camera. Your video was a good check against the feelings of having to keep up with the joneses. Thanks from sunning Alberta!!
Nice and clean results! I recently sold my Nikon D750 and all the lenses I had. Upgraded to an Z6 mark II with only two lenses. So in a way I downgraded. Didn't cost me a whole lot, all the stuff fits in a much smaller bag and wheighs a lot less. The Z6 is a joy to use. I am happy. But will it make my pictures any better? No, I don't think so. The quality of my pics are in me and not in my gear....I totally agree with you: which goals do you expect from upgrading and what is that you need. See you next week!
I own a 5DSR, it is the single most incredibly befitting camera for my needs, and while using it for almost everything including landscapes, wildlife, nature, art, macro, sports, portraits and everything else, it is spectacular. The focus system is up for literally anything. i get all shots in focus for whatever i do, my focus rate is almost 100%. i am more than content with the fps. i dont understand who needs any more stops of dynamic range and for what purposes? who would intentionally underexpose that much? yes the high iso performance can sometimes be an issue, but i am ready to work around it and i understand why that would be an issue for some and the weight but they dont bother me. i dont like holding a mirrorless, its utterly unauthentic, and none of the newer models satisfy my needs. i love my 5DSR and my incredible collection of lenses with it. i dont shoot video, so its a perfect camera for me. excellent video, loved the summary hehe, cheers
Spot on review Gary and beautifully articulated. I have had my 5DSr for a few year and had the chance to test it against the R5 extensively in the Dales a few weeks ago. Exactly the same conclusions for landscapes although I didn’t push the files as far as you did.
Great video Gary I have an R5 but I agree with your conclusions, for LANDSCAPE photography it really is not worth the extra cost. For me, I shoot portraits and landscapes and wanted a camera that could excel in both disciplines....I'm not disappointed at all. Keep up the great work, always look forward to your videos.
Hi Gary I have had the 5DSR for a few years now .. they are great cameras .. but you need a serious quality lens on the front or it will punish you for sharpness. I use a Zeiss distagon 15mm f2.8 . I had a canon 16/35f2.8 mkii which softened the resolution. So in low light the 5DSR is not the best . But when it all comes together the resolution is brilliant. I love my 5DSR . I don’t think in terms of resolution I don’t think the R5 is 3 times better for the money! Thanks for this comparison which no one to date I have seen do .I also have used my 5DSR for extensive wildlife.. with the canon 300mm f2.8 .. shutter speed must be high up over 1000 and when you get the sweet spot of that lens it’s a deadly combination. The one thing many people don’t realise is the quality of your lens determines the size of the image size . The higher the quality of lens the bigger the resolution files . I have jpg files bigger than 50mb from the 5DSR , these are single shot image files .
In theory, there is nothing you can't shoot with the 5DSr. It's about the whistles and bells that determines who the camera is targeted at. It obviously makes sense to buy a camera with a higher fire rate to shoot sport though. But as you said, it'll still be a great camera for wedding and wildlife etc. Cheers Ross 👍👍
I own 5dsr too and I'm totally agree with you. You need a better glass to experience the difference. I use 24-70 f/4 L lens most of the times. I sold my 24-105 f/4 L lens to switch to 24-70 and noticed the difference. The camera itself is very unforgiving if you are not careful with your shutter speed.
One of your best videos Gary. I enjoy them all, but this one was worth your work, and redoing that closing as many times as you did was the right choice. Thx for keeping the tone straight - mind vs. heart - true need vs. desire. Well done. I also primarily focus on landscape and architecture, but play around with or at least have the desire to do more macro, pets, family shots and who knows what since this is only a hobby for me - nothing professional. I too don’t have a need for video today, but having more capabilities is plus in terms of hopefully allowing me to hang on to this body a little longer than I perhaps otherwise would. Be it personal computers or electronic/camera gear, I always try to buy a little more capability than I presently need, so it hopefully lasts me a little longer. I tend to leap frog technology changes vs. doing many perhaps more expensive incremental changes along the way. Besides using my iPhone 12 Pro that is always with me, I wanted to make the jump from my trusty 5DIII mirror to mirrorless one day. I only had those two cameras - one primarily for snaps when I’m out and about, the other when I want to focus on my hobby, bring out the good glass and perhaps the tripod. I’ve been watching and waiting in the wings as the mirrorless tech has been evolving. When the R5 came out, I consciously allowed my heart and desire to override my normal analytical ways, spending the extra cash for an R5 over a lesser mirrorless model that would have fit my needs today just as well. The R5 is much more than I need or presently use today, and like you, I would never recommend it feature/function/price-wise for someone that does only landscape. I’m glad to have made the switch to mirrorless and hopeful my R5 serves me well for years to come, with plenty of capabilities to explore beyond my core love of landscape and architecture. THX AGAIN for your great channel Gary.
Great honest review. Best I think I have seen. It is rather dependent on one's shooting needs and shooting methods more than anything else. It really makes one think WHY does one prefer one over the other and what is needed. The R5 seems to me to be a better camera for general use. The 5DSr is good for certain usages with specific techniques. There is no sensor stabilization on the 5DSr and it won't benefit from new lenses, but on a tripod and with the correct technique and such, it is, for most practical purposes as good as the R5, albeit with larger files and more noise in the shadows. Lots to ponder. One thing I would like to see is hand held images of landscapes, what is lost there between the 2 cameras. One may not have time for a tripod in every situation. Best wishes, thanks!
I've been shooting landscapes and stills with the 5DMKII for over 11 years now and am finally considering an upgrade. I was looking closely at the 5DSR for a long time, but my attention was taken away by the mirrorless cameras. This video has been very helpful for me, as I am having trouble justifying the cost of the R5 compared to the older 5DSR.
Great Video Gary thank you so much. I'm in my early 60s and a very keen hobbyist who changed to the R5 as my first full frame from a 70D, which as you mentioned, was a huge leap forward. But the 5DRS was a camera I was also considering as a close friend of mine has the same camera and his images always looked fantastic when we compared after a Landscape shoot. The flexibility of the R5 for means I can use it for many other things other than Landscape like motor sport although shooting Landscape images is my first love.
There's just one reason I'd consider the R-series and it's the amazing mirrorless focussing ability, on moving subjects. Having eye-tracking focus is a game changer for portraits and weddings. It means you can concentrate on composition, and interaction with the subject, rather than constantly doing focus/recompose on the eyes. I can get this with a canon RP though, for about £800 (although the R6mk2 may be the R5 killer for me). It's 2023 and time for an R5mk2 ..... that may be the camera to rule them all.
HI Gary, thanks a lot for the video, the great effort and the availability of the images to test. I made a noise technical analysis using common photography software. It is not how it should be done to be conclusive but the orders of magnitude of the results will be close to the real solution. I took the two images of the under exposed peer from CR2 and CR3 files and increased the shadows +100 in ACR. Then on PS a gauss filter was applied to remove high frequency response (usually associated with noise). Then the filtered image was subtracted from the original one and the results exported as a new document. Finally the mean of the subtraction and the amount of "noisy" pixels were counted. By doing this the results were approximately the following: CR2 file has 12% more noise and 6% more intensity in the noise (possibility to perceive it). This can be done using more specialized tools but also will required more controlled original image parameters. Bottom line: CR2 is noisier, but is the CR3 files almost 4K$ "cleaner"? For web consuming even in 4K displays may be no. For high end printing product/fashion/art/wildlife when for some reason you have this contrast and under exposed situations? May be yes.
Blimey, that's pretty technical stuff :) I just use my eyes 😁😁 Sometimes I'm glad I'm not interested in the techy side 😁😁 Cheers for the explanation xx
I appreciate the time and effort you put into this. I've got an R5 but I saw that the 5DS R was on sale right now for only $1500 US. It sold new for about $4000. At $1500, I thought it would make a great every day camera so that I wasn't wearing out my brand new R5 on unimportant stuff and it will also let me keep running my EF glass a few more years at least. My 1DX is getting long in the tooth and has seen lots of use. It's going to give up the ghost any day now. It seems from this video that $1500 is a steal for the 5DSR considering the image quality it has. Sure, the R5 may outperform it a bit a the extremes, but like you say, I rarely find myself in those situations. If and when I do, I can always bring out the R5. And the bonus is my R5 uses the same exact battery as the 5DS R and I've got 8 of them waiting to be use. Thanks to your video, this choice seems to be a no-brainer.
Hi Gary, interestingly I made these comments on you Mk III vs R6 vid, (hadn't found this one then). In short my 5Ds does what you have shown and described perfectly here. Only additional observation was the apparent noise in the video, then I realised your shirt really is like that ;) Great job again, thank you! I'm a bit late commenting I know but the 5Ds means I still don't need to change.
5DS/R is such a great camera - even after all those years. Hugely underrated when it came out. Best Canon sensor until the release of the 5R. I'm moving to mirrorless myself for the high MPIX action shots, but for landscapes it makes perfect sense to stay with the 5DS/R.
Thank you for the video. I’m a permanent DSLR user and find no reason whatsoever to switch to mirrorless cameras. Don’t care whether manufacturers are going to make DSLRs in future or not because, I own five Canon pro bodies and ten native lenses that will last for at least ten years more. Therefore, I’m least bothered about gears and instead, concentrate on photography. As a hobbyist, I shoot landscapes, street life and wildlife. For capturing fast action; the EVF lag of mirrorless cameras is a huge turnoff. It never captures what it sees at any given split-second moment. So, glory to mirrored cameras that will never vanish from the market as our good old friend Pentax has decided to continue producing them and not get carried away by the mirrorless hype. Thanks again.
Thank you for this extensive review. I have a very large number of EF lenses and several cameras that use those lenses natively. While I understand I can purchase an adapter to continue to use those lenses on an R5, I hesitate because of my reluctance to use adapters of any sort. Maybe I am wrong in thinking this. I will soon be picking up two secondhand camera bodies (a 5DS and a 5DSR [they were so cheap it was just a spur of the moment decision to get both]) and this video has certainly cemented, in my mind, that I will not regret the decision to purchase them. (And, here in Australia, the R5 would be around 6 times the cost of both the 'new-to-me' bodies combined).
Sense and commonsense will always shine through. Your video today shined like the Northern Star! For me, If I had a Canon Mirrored camera with my EF lenses and wanted an upgrade, I would search out a good second-hand 5DSR. That is because I would be shooting landscapes, seascapes, and cityscapes with a bit of street photography. Then if I had the money to splash the cash...I maybe would use the money saved between Second-Hand 5DSR & R5 and buy or upgrade a lens or two. Good lenses are for life...cameras are like cars. Anyways my pennyworth for what it's worth.
Absolutely nailed it Gary. Digital cameras (mirrored or mirrorless) are simply data collection devices, where all collected data end up in the a processing system (LR or any other software) to produce images. So think out what works for you away from the hype created by the manufacturers.
Thank you for introducing readly, I never knew what it was. I hope it worked using you link as I had to switch to Germany. I hope this helps to support you a little bit. I really like your channel and hope to see many more videos! Best regards from Germany! Tanja
Hello Gary. Greetings from WA State, USA! I found your video thru a search on the subject. I am very glad that I found your channel. This high quality professional grade informative video is one of the best ever I’ve seen on RU-vid. You convinced me that my mighty 5DSR is a keep for landscape photography. Thank you very much! Liked and subscribed.
@@GaryGough thank you Gary. Do you discuss post processing techniques on your channel? That’s an interesting topic to me and would love to learn from you.
I have been looking at a 5DSr because my R5 has been programmed to defocus third party lenses. Using my Sigma 120-300 f2.8 I get excellent results with my 5D4, but switching to the R5 only 20% are sharp. The 5D4 is excellent, only sometimes I want the cropping power of the R5. Primarily this is when using Sigma lenses, also 150-600, 150 macro, to ensure sharpness. Of course an alternative would be a Sony with an adapter but I don't want another system.
Big fan Gary, great, interesting video however I feel that there is a little unfair bias. 1st cost: how much was the 5Dsr when it was introduced (pro rata) can't compare a new camera to a second hand one. 2nd You used EF lenses on a mirrorless camera, try RF lenses on the camera its designed for. 3rd There are loads of focal points on the R5 that are useful to avoid focus, recompose. 4th Are you getting mega bytes and megapixels mixed up? you showed 45000kb up to 90odd they aren't MP are they? or am I missing something? Yep you've guessed it I have an R5 and absolutely love it but I don't only shoot Landscapes so the eye detection for wildlife and motorsport is awesome and 20fps even the video So I fully understand where you are coming from, although if I were only shooting landscapers I'd go medium format.
Fair points Gray. I do think the price, old or new should play a major part in the comparison though. When it comes to the lenses I used, my hands were pretty much tied. I did have RF lenses but they won't fit the 5DSr as you know. Furthermore, not everyone who buys the R5 will only use RF lenses. It obviously makes sense to but that's an even larger cost. I'm guessing you love your R5 then 😁😁 Cheers Gray
I'm a complete novice when it comes to photography, here we go, however, I am pretty frugal. Moreover, I have been subscribing to other professional photographers at the top of their game, one of them being Tim House Studio an absolutely top-notch commercial photographer. I won't put a link in, but search this "Is this all DSLRs Achieved in 23 years?" and it's an extraordinary evaluation of digital cameras. If you're a commercial photographer like Tim he requires you to shoot seriously hi-res images. So in 23 years cameras haven't really come that far. It's just sales garb trying to get people to buy something that they actually really don't need. I'm a complete novice, but I look at things across the board and evaluate everything. I could be wrong but who knows!
Appreciate your time and effort in this video Gary. I suppose the key element to landscape photography rather than the camera bodies themselfs is the lenses used. Far better to get a second hand canon 5dsr with a top quality lens, than get the canon R5 with a cheaper lens, assuming the money people have to spend is limited. There will always be this feeling that newer is always better, but perhaps when it comes to landscape photography that probably isn’t so. The majority of cameras from the last few years are fantastic, which means there are some second hand bargains, especially where bodies are concerned and this video of yours proves that.
Comments on relationship between MegaPixels and file size for the CanonRaw files has already been made. Absolute uncompressed raw files would be 2 to 3 times the size. As a purely Landscape camera, you are probably right. The R5 offers little more for the money for that genre. However, few of us use our cameras for just one type of photography. As you rightly say, the autofocus in the R5 and also the video features provide an incredibly competent all-round camera. Those features are streets ahead. The RF glass is a step up in quality too.
Great comparison Gary. I would love to get my hands on the R5 - I shoot landscape and wildlife. But can't justify that price tag at the moment. Nice to see you sticking with Canon. Always enjoy your videos.
Thats one excellent video Gary - no nonsense, just testing and saying it as it is - well done you. Personally I could never, ever justify that kind of money on a hobby but I still found the vid very interesting. Canon must be just aiming at you pro's with a tag like that, same as all the other brands. Us peasants are well and truly being ignored now.
Great video Gary, you just explained why I have only just upgraded from a 5D MkII. As a landscape photographer I have been getting great images from my MkII, apparently the focusing wasn't that great but trees don't move that fast 🤣. A lot of my recent work has been created with stitched panoramas so that even eliminated the need for more megapixels. However, I have recently started doing a lot more wildlife photography and while I could still get great shots with the 5D MkII I knew that it was making my life harder than it had to be. I'm now the happy owner of an R5 and loving it. I think it's fair to say I got money's worth from the 5D MkII 😊
@@GaryGough For wildlife photography it's simply amazing. Being able to preview the shots in the viewfinder just blew my mind, you can zoom in and really see if they are sharp 👍. My 5d MkII is now my second camera that holds my wide angle lens while the R5 has the 150 - 600 mounted, so nice not to have to swap lenses all the time.
Thank you Gary! I also have a 5diii and was waiting, as you were, for the 5dv that didn't happen. I am really grateful for your video which reiterated my own thoughts and helped me cut through the hype and confusion to make that final upgrading decision. Again thank you.
Thank You ! Thank You ! Thank You ! Gary ...what a brilliant comparison, and thank you Colin for lending Gary the means of doing his usual 'From the heart' blogs. Extremely impressive and professional presentation , packed with great information. I've followed you for a long time, sadly not seen much (my fault) since you left podcasting with 'the boys' ...I'm back in the saddle - Looking forward to catching up ...Keep up the GREAT work
Agree with Macro Daz, Sensor size and file size do not correlate. I was intrigued that your High ISO test was at 800 ISO. Sorry but high ISO these days is 25,600+ ISO. I agree with your conclusion the R5 is not a landscape camera.
Agree re my high ISO test but a high ISO test for landscape cameras is roughly 800. Wedding photography is another matter of course but I wanted to put the camera through it's paces as a landscape photographer. Plus, I know the R5 would handle noise so much better than the 5DSr. Cheers Keith 👍👍
@@GaryGough Fully understand.100 ISo is base for landscape. For railway photography (my hobby) 400-800 iso is a base with 1600-3200 iso often needed. 1/1000 sec shutter speed needed and with a train you cannot "wait forthe light". Different horses for different courses.. Cheers Keith
Really enjoyed that Gary, I shoot with a Nikon D810 (36 mega pixel) and also find the file sizes are bigger than 36mb almost all of the time, usually in the 39-42mb range. I upgraded from a D5600 (24 megapixel) and again this ranged from 22mb-29mb all the time. Fascinating never even considered this! Loved the video and look forward to the next! All the best 👍
Nice video Gary. Keep in mind that MegaPixels has nothing to do with the MegaByte size of the image. When you say a 45MegaPixel Camera should make a 45MegaByte image, those numbers are not directly relatable. In general a larger MegaPixel camera will have higher MegaByte image, but they aren't directly relatable. The image formats capture more than pixels, they capture color via different bit depths (Number of colors they capture), then the files are compressed by different formats, and other overhead data. MegaPixel is the number of pixels the sensor has, the R5 sensor is a 8192 x 5464 sensor. If you multiply those numbers together you get 44,761,088 pixels, or 44,761 Kilo-Pixels, or 45 Mega-Pixles (Rounded up).
Fair point in that the justification of how good the 5dsr is for great landscape photography. I have a 5ds and wouldn't want to spend £3k on a body. I have other cameras for sport and action, also old DSLR cameras in 1dx and 7dii. I have never spent more than £1k on a camera body and had fantastic rewards. Some may say weight has a bearing on the difference, but the body difference is circa 200g and the RF 14-35 f4 v EF 16-35 f4 is only circa 60g, so little difference.
Garry I think you are spot on with your final conclusion about the R5, you don’t NEED to spend this amount of money just to take landscape photographs. But I find it an absolute joy to use every time I get it out the bag and the amount of features packed into it make it fun to play around with in other areas of photography. Oh and Just another little thing the R5 would probably eek out a bit more image quality with a native lense fitted, not sure you used one did you?
Thanks, a no nonsense well done video. Very professional and informing. I had the same questions but you hit it right on the head and discussed it as a seasoned photographer. So refreshing, well done.
Thank you for providing the R5 and 5DsR RAW files. There's no doubt the R5 sensor is better and Canon has come a long way on this. One thing I also noticed is at the far end of the pier the R5 has better clarity and depth on it where on the 5DsR it is all fuzzy. I am definitely upgrading to R5 but waiting for the right moment and the right time to do so. Watching that R3 in development, the only problem is I also shoot wildlife so speed and accuracy is important for me.
Very interesting video Gary, especially as I have come from the commercial world and have downgraded to a series of 5DS & R. Great cameras, but not a high degree of dynamic range, AND the R5 has a few advantages that are obvious as you said. But it all comes down to what you need it for because in 75% of cases it's probably overkill for most of the punters on here. The r5 has a 12% larger pixel area as opposed to the 5DSR, but that only translates to a percentage of situations. As a sports camera its probably ideal for most stringers, and with video, I wouldn't really know as we use Alexas, and Red Epics for that type of work. I enjoy my 5DSR's though as for developing artistic projects they are fantastic. Both above and under the water. Keep the videos coming, its all about learning new things, and we are never too old to pick up new tricks and tips. :)
Yes but Gary the R5 will always be much better for wildlife Photography..... :Þ lol, sorry couldn't resist it Gary. In all seriousness though I think we are reaching the pinnacle of how good camera sensors can do, and its becoming far more important to spend the extra cash on good glass, although the price of good glass is really coming down in price nowadays, and the like of Sigma and Tamron are really rivalling the big names (Canon, Nikon, etc) for a lot less money. The test I would be most interested to see would be your Canon 5DSR against the new Fuji medium format cameras, specifically the 50megapixel Fuji. How much difference would the medium format make, after all in the grand scheme of things its not that much more than an R5...... If you ever get the chance to borrow the Fuji Gary I would love to see that video.
I would love to Steve but If I'm honest, I'm not that keen on doing the techy stuff too much. It bores me, sorry. I'd rather use my time out and about taking pictures with whatever camera I have.
I had a lot of great moments with the 5dsr. It had issues though, noisy in dark enviroments and long exposures is one. But overall one of my best cameras ever. I now own an R5, coming from an a7r IV where I did not like the outcome of images and colors..Quite happy with the R5, not that much noise as the 5dsr and overall great. But for landscapes I probably would be quite as happy with the 5dsr, at the third of a price of the R5, to be honest.
This video has verified my original opinion of both of these cameras. As a real estate/architecture and landscape photographer, there's absolutely no way I could ever justify spending $3,700 for a 45mp body vs spending $1,500 for a 50mp. I already own a Canon EOS R 30mp body with which I'm pleased, and have previously owned a 5DS r (which I regret having sold). I appreciate your well balanced analyses of these cameras and the fact that you've provided a clear understanding of their use in your style of photography. I've just come upon this video and have decided to subscribe to your channel. I look forward to viewing more of your videos. Thank you.
@@rickigoode8536 I find the EOS. R to be very capable in terms of photographic quality. It is substantively different from the 5DS and 5DSr in terms of megapixels, however its 30.2 mp sensor is superior in dynamic range. Another benefit of the EOS R vs the 5DS and 5DSr is its articulating touch screen which is a great asset. And if you’re into video, it also shoots 4k, although with a substantial 1.6 crop. The EOS R’s lack of a 2nd card slot doesn’t mean anything to me because of what and how I shoot. That said, it may be a drawback for a run-and-gun photographer who shoots weddings or other live-action events, like sports. Finally, the price is also very accommodating, especially if when buying used, as I did. Hope this info is helpful.
@@kennethjonesphotography Thank you. These have been what I have also established in research, so I don't feel I get any better or worse through changing the 5ds to an R personally. The R also wouldn't be a suitable replacement of my 1dx or 7dii for sports and wildlife action either, as seem to miss shots on lesser FPS. I still need to try one for a few days though. Where do you display your work?
After analyzing raw files from both cameras, I can say that R5 has: 1) less noise in shadows (more noticable when pushed) 2) better small details rendering at 100% view 3) worse colours overall and espicially worse colour details in pushed shadows The last thing you can see in a picture of a building after pushing shadows +100. Most colour tones are here on 5DSR (see flowers in the background and in front of the building) and there are very little left in R5 picture. So, better dynamic range of R5 in terms of colour quality is hardly usable. I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings here, but I'm getting progressively dissapointed with Canon colours with newer models. It all started for me when 6D M2 replaced original 6D's colours, especially in shadows/or high ISO's. And now these R5 and R6 with their "neutral" (rather dull) reds, oranges and blues. Plus, greenish and magentish tints in areas where previous models shined with perfect (in comparison) colours. It looks like you need to pay a certain price for better noise perfomance in these cameras not only in pounds but also in image quality.
Agree to a certain respect. Don't forget, I was pushing the files to within an inch of their lives. If I was shooting the pier in normal circumstances, I would have bracketed the images. The slight loss of quality wouldn't have been a factor then. It's still nice to know it's there though. Cheers Dorian
A fantastic contribution & analysis sir! 'Colour science' _is_ a thing, & I think it's ironically been being overlooked & left behind as Canon chases Sony. Ironic because Canon were always on top in this specific regard.
I got the 5ds in January of 2024 because I already had a huge selection of EF L series lenses and an R6. For just the 50 megapixels it made sense to get a 5ds instead of an R5.
Great review but I think you've confused file size with sensor megapixels. The RAW file size is a function of the CR3 codec used by canon and the image complexity. I think the IBIS in the R5 certainly gives more scope for hand-held landscape photography and the EVF is also great in low light. It's great to be able to see your image even with a 10 or 15 stop ND filter on. Like you I've used a 5DIII for over 12 years, but as I've got older I find I really wanted to carry less weighty kit around. The R5 price is a tad pricey for me, but last year I picked up an EOS R at bargain price and the image quality is much better than my 5DIII. Love the flippy-our screen (less old age bending required) but the mode dial on top is a huge step backwards, as is the on-off dial (which I refuse to call a switch because it isn't) which is so difficult to use in sub-zero temperatures.
Very interesting and well thought out. I have had the 5dsr for years now and it’s been great, however I am getting an R5 because of the weight advantage but mainly because I shoot wildlife. If I was shooting landscapes I would definitely stay with the 5dsr. Perhaps I have chosen the wrong genre!
Your spot on to say that upgrading from a 5DSr to an R5 (For Landscapes) is a complete waste of money Gary, As a Landscape Photographer myself, I own the Nikon D850 and moving to a Nikon Z7II would be the same scenario for me, The D850 is feature rich and TBH I rarely use most of it as most are not required for Landscape photography, but the lack of a Low Pass Filter and the new Backside Illuminated sensor which helps to increase the performance of the Dynamic Range is a different matter and thats what sold it to me (from a D800 previous), these are the features I look for when I'm thinking of an upgrade and if there is no increase in performance in detail and Dynamic Range then I'm not interested.
Hello Gary. I own a Nikon D850 The file size for the nikon is, for raw uncompressed 14-bit files, #92.0MB : Hard time for my PC running Darktable and the GIMP :-) Many thanks for your videos. Update : And I do no expect to move to a mirorless camera yet :-)
Such a truthful evaluation. Thank you Gary.. You have most certainly earned the respect and trust of those that use this equipment and have enlightend us as to how we should approach the future... Thank you again....so much. Best wishes 2 U.
I'm extremely late to comment on this video. I've been trough all the major brands and I agree that it's not much that pull them apart. Sony is superior regarding dynamic range. Canon is superior regarding the ease of color manipulation. Nikon is somewhere in between. Fuji (crop sensor) is way too "muddy" to be acceptable. I'm sticking with Sony for the moment just for the form factor. This system have no competition regarding option of small full frame lenses. So I'm set regarding camera system, for now. What I do lack is inspiration. That is why I watch your videos. Thank you for sharing!
Hi Gary I'm not a Canon shooter - maybe I should be - the 5DSR looks like a bargain. But I enjoy your videos so watched it anyway. I was a little confused over equating file size to megapixels - I think the correlation is very loose and probably depends on complexity and colour depth of the image as well as compression. Full size uncompressed fuji X raw files are ~55mb yet the images are only 24-26mpx. The raw file doesn't contain the image per se - just the info needed to make it, a bit like the ingredients for a cake (raw) rather than the finished article (jpeg). The recipe comes from the software post-processing. Taking the analogy further - if you have all the ingredients to make a 8" chocolate cake , they might fit into a box of a certain size. Lets say you wanted to add jam and sprinkles - the cake is the same size but more complex....but the box of ingredients is larger. PS - Mormon church - awesome. I've been meaning to shoot that for ages!
Been using the R5 since November. Amazing camera. You have to learn the set up more. As being a mirror less. RF lenses are a lot more expensive sadly. If you use for landscape/seascapes as i do. Turn off ibis, as on a tripod.
Always enjoy watching the camera we have is all you need just go out and use it enjoy what you have it is not all about the best camera money can buy .
I used the RF lenses on the R6 comparison video. The difference is marginal. The EF 16-35mm lens is super sharp. The difference between the lenses was minimal. Cheers Mark
Your findings make perfect sense. If you still are creating knockout shots with what you have and you do not at the moment need any of the extra bells and things, it only makes sense to keep what you have, and only upgrade when you need to.
100% agree with you ! I myself bought the 5DSr recently from the 5DMKII and it's amazing !!! Way better to save some cash for lenses than spending all on the R5 body only !
Agree ----- there are so many variables in capturing a quality landscape image that if your camera is good enough, then get out and use it and dont worry about new 'better' kit.
Gary you saved me 6000 bucks. I will stick with my 5D sr! I never work at extremes of lighting or iso… I will stay with my wonderful Dsr… I never used the whistles and bells on the 5 dsr so as you said… would I need them now on a new camera..nope… Your comments are excellent…
