Reader “Tom” writes to ask:
I’ve read your reports on the 5Dsr. I assume by now you have one? Maybe you have different thoughts now, but you seem to point to the new body being good for large print/detail, but maybe not so great for fine art print.
If that’s still the case, what would you opt for if leaning towards fine art prints, large, maybe a heavily cropped slice measuring say 16″ x 72″ or so? Minus a mf body.
I’m looking to switch bodies and thinking the 5dsr or possibly the Nikon d810. Just curious what your thoughts might be if you ever had time. Thanks.
It has been a while since I’ve written about the Canon 5DS and the 5DsR cameras here, but since you asked I’ll share more based on my extensive use of the 5DsR over the past months. I have used it to photography everything from landscapes to people to wildlife. I think I see several sub-questions here, so let me respond to each of them.
Are the 5DsR and 5DS good for large prints?
Absolutely. I regularly print at 24″ x 36″ sizes, sometimes from source files that have been cropped, and the image quality potential is outstanding. Of course, getting the most from the camera for large prints also depends on technique — paying careful attention to focus, depth of field issues, camera stability, and post-processing techniques.
I wrote about some of my early testing in an article at this website: Canon 5DS R: A Printing Test. In this test I worked with sample images from Canon that I optimized for printing at several very large sizes. The quality of the 30″ x 45″ equivalent print was outstanding. I decided to push things to the (absurd!) size 60″ x 90″ just for fun — a nose-to-print inspection reveals some softness, naturally, but a usable print could be made at this size.
Are the 5DsR and 5DS good for “fine art” prints.
Absolutely. That’s the kind of print I make. Beyond the obvious issue of resolution — where these cameras are currently best of class — the rest of the story might look at things like how the camera handles color, noise, dynamic range, and so forth. I can push these files in rather significant ways and get wonderful print quality. I have written about and illustrated this in a couple of articles here. Take a look at The Canon EOS 5Ds R — Dynamic Range Examples and The Canon EOS 5Ds R — A Resolution Example.
What about working with very large prints of radically cropped images?
One of the advantages of high sensor resolution cameras such as the 5DsR and 5DS is that carefully produced image files can be cropped more without running into issues of sensor or pixel resolution. So these 51MP files, with more than 8000 pixels in the horizontal dimension, can retain good pixel resolution even when cropped significantly.
There is no question that more pixels have the potential to be better than fewer pixels in these situations, but what about your specific example of producing (I assume from a single frame) a fine art 16″ x 72″ print? This would be equivalent to a full 48″ x 72″ print — right between the two tests I describe in my article referenced above.
That is an interesting question, and there are a lot of variables to consider. For example, what is the subject? Is it a highly detailed landscape or architecture photograph that will be displayed in a fine art context and possibly expected to be extremely sharp? Is it a more abstract image or perhaps a portrait, where absolute sharpness is not quite as important?
Because this is a somewhat subjective area, I’m not going to give you a single, definitive answer — but I think my answer is useful and realistic.
- If you are looking for nose-to-print distance ultimate sharpness in a print that is 72″ wide, you may not quite get what you expect. (However, realistically, and based on personally viewing a lot of extremely large prints, many people have some unrealistic notions of the actual sharpness of giant prints.) I urge you to try to get your hands on a sample file and run some tests like those I described in my article, and see whether this gets you where you want to be.
- If your expectations are a bit more realistic — sharpness typical of very large prints — the camera can do a fine job even at such giant sizes, especially if you shoot carefully, post-process with skill, and know what you are doing as a printer.
- Since you mentioned a comparison to MF (“minus a mf body”), I’ll say something about that. A MF body with similar photo site count would not produce an image of appreciably different sharpness, since at these sizes it is more about photo sites than about imaging area. On the other hand, there are MF systems that go to 80MP or even 100MP that can produce higher system resolution. They also cost more than most new cars… ;-)
- If you know you are going to produce very wide panoramic format images, is cropping a single image the best way to get there? If you are working for the absolute highest image quality possible, the answer is “no.” I have made and licensed some prints with dimensions like those you mention, with the resulting prints being between 15 and 30 feet wide. The 15 foot width image is part of an installation in a corporate environment and the 30 foot wide image is installed in a retail location. For both of these photographs I create multi-image stitched files which consists of a series of single images combined to produce an extremely high resolution image that can be printed at gigantic sizes.
What about other options like the Nikon D810 or the Sony a7R II?
We are quite fortunate to have several high resolution options to select from. Each has its pluses and minuses relative to the others. The Canon bodies produce the highest available full frame sensor resolution. The Nikon and Sony sensors come close but they also provide a bit more dynamic range and lower noise. But the fact is that the real difference among them are far from night and day, and all three can produce very large high quality photographs.
A good friend who long photographed with large format film and who later moved to high end medium format digital gear has recently also been working with the D810. At a recent print review he shared cropped prints from unidentified sources and asked for our observations, without telling us any more about the images. We agreed that all of them were technically excellent. Then he revealed that some had been photographed using a 80MP Phase One medium format digital system while others had been photographed with a D810 using the Nikon 80-400mm zoom — and we couldn’t tell the difference.
The short answer —finally! — is that these full frame system can perform beautifully and be used to create large, high quality prints. Yet, if your intent is to produce very large panoramic images you may wish to try using the stitching approach with any of them.
Relevant Articles
- The Canon EOS 5Ds R — Autofocus Torture Test
- The Canon EOS 5Ds R — Dynamic Range Examples
- The Canon EOS 5Ds R — A Resolution Example
- Canon 5DS R: A Printing Test
- Looking at Canon 5Ds RAW Files: Noise and Dynamic Range.
This website has an affiliate relationship with B&H Photo. Your purchases through website links return a percentage of the sale price to this website — but your cost remains the same.
G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist. His book, “California’s Fall Color: A Photographer’s Guide to Autumn in the Sierra” is available from Heyday Books and Amazon.
Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email
All media © Copyright G Dan Mitchell and others as indicated. Any use requires advance permission from G Dan Mitchell.