The 5DS (including the 5DS R variant) is Canon’s new 50.6MP full frame DSLR. The camera provides the highest resolution sensor of any current full frame cameras, along with several other improved features.
(The 5DS R model cancels the anti-aliasing filter that has long been a standard feature of digital cameras. The “R” model is back-ordered, so those who want that version and don’t want to wait should consider putting in an order.)
(You may use the links in this paragraph to order/reserve either the 5DS or the 5DS R from site-sponsor B&H photo. I have reserved mine — I’m going with the “R” model.)
From time to time I adapt things that I wrote elsewhere and re-share them on the blog. The following is something I contributed to a discussion about a question from a newish photographer who wondered how important it would be to upgrade his camera.
I’m all for better image quality — which contemporary cameras, software, and printing processes provide in spades. And there is no question that, all else being equal, a photograph captured on a larger film or sensor format can potentially resolve more detail, and may improve other image parameters including dynamic range and noise.
As they say, “So stipulated.”
But the question (which was about choosing a sensor format) deserves a more nuanced and contextual answer than that. Fortunately, the most accurate and useful answer involves quite a bit of that nuance. I think it really comes down to something like, “Will replacing my cropped sensor camera with a full frame camera make my photographs look better?”. The best answer begins with, “It depends.”
As to the question (which also came up in the original discussion) of what is important in a photograph, image sharpness is not unimportant in many cases. (Though there certainly are photographs whose “goodness” is perhaps at least partially because they are blurred — softness and blur are not always things to be avoided.)
I think the issue in photography discussions is frequently about the balance among issues that affect the quality and effectiveness of a photograph. Here, it is not uncommon for some folks to exhibit a misplaced focus on the technical stuff, accompanied by insufficient attention to other things that are more important to their success as photographers. Continue reading Misplaced Focus (Morning Musings 12/3/14)→
Recently someone posed — for the 11,535th time — a question about camera brands: Who is truly winning when it comes to the sensor game?
The context of the question had to do with recent advances in digital camera sensors from Sony, found in certain Sony cameras and in Nikon DSLR bodies. (These recent sensors have pushed a few boundaries forward, as always happens when new components are developed and released. In this case, they increase the photo site density and dynamic range.)
As a sometime Bay Area baseball fan, I understand that the concept of “who is winning?” is a nebulous and ephemeral one. Take the Oakland A’s, one of my SF Bay Area teams. A few months ago no one could touch them — they were on a record-breaking winning streak and were the hard-scrabble, underdog heroes of baseball. By the end of the season they couldn’t win and they slipped inexorably from a sure bet to “ain’t gonna happen,” barely scraping out a chance to get one wild-card playoff game… which they lost.
The other Bay Area team, the SF Giants (my emotional favorite, since I grew up following them) was up, was down, and never, even at their best, looked like a sure bet for anything. They had been in the lead, but not by that much, and in the end they came out just a bit behind the (evil, nefarious) Dodgers… but also qualified for a wildcard spot. And they won that wildcard game in fine fashion and go on to a division playoff today. (Giants fans have a word for this, though the full context perhaps only makes sense to those who have watched the team for a while: Torture.)
So, the answer to “who is winning?” is either a very much “in the moment” answer that means virtually nothing over the long run OR there could be some final competitive event at which a final winner is determined… for this year. And then the process starts all over again, and someone else “is winning.”
Extrapolated to photography equipment, right now I would say that Nikon is something like one of the two teams in our California Giants/Dodgers rivalry. Depending on which week you check, one of them is doing better than the other in some ways, but neither will ever be proven (says the Giants fan… ;-) to win in a a final, ultimate, never-to-be-challenged way. Ahead? Yes. How long? Probably not very? The winner? No.
Right now Nikon has an edge by some measure. On the basis of other factors, it doesn’t. A few months or a year from now… who knows? And, really, when it comes to photography — as differentiated from fawning over gear specifications — who cares?
But, yes, the Dodgers won the division title. This year. I’m not bitter. Yet.
Morning Musings are somewhat irregular posts in which I write about whatever is on my mind at the moment. Connections to photography may be tenuous at times!
G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist whose subjects include the Pacific coast, redwood forests, central California oak/grasslands, the Sierra Nevada, California deserts, urban landscapes, night photography, and more. Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email
(This is another in a series of articles based on posts I shared elsewhere. This one is based on a reply to a post concerning how important it is to move to a newer, improved sensor with higher photo site density. The immediate question had to do with how often the improvements would be significant enough to be seen, and the writer had correctly pointed out that there can be advantages to higher “MP count” when making very large, high quality prints.)
It is useful to try for a realistic understanding of how and when a higher MP sensor may show its advantages. This post tries to not take a position on brands and models, but rather to lay out a comparison of some relevant technical stuff — from which we can all draw our own individual conclusions.
There is a point below which you would be hard pressed to tell the difference between prints made from 22MP and 36MP cameras and above which you might be able to.(1) For example, virtually everyone would agree that the difference is typically completely invisible in small web images, and virtually everyone would agree that it could be visible if you closely inspect a print that is six feet wide. Since we could debate just where the boundary is — and, frankly, it is somewhat subjective — you could pick any point on the print size scale that you want and the principles will be the same.
Some Comparisons
Just for fun, let me use completely arbitrarily use two print sizes and base the comparisons on the 22MP Canon 5D Mark III and the Sony/Canon 36MP sensor cameras. Continue reading Concerning Megapixels→
G Dan Mitchell is a California photographer and visual opportunist. Blog | About | Flickr | Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | 500px.com | LinkedIn | Email
