5dmkiii or 5dsr

[Richmate]

Hi All

Quick question for you all if I may.

What would be you choice 5dmkiii or 5dsr for both landscapes and weddings?

I have my first couple weddings next year and want to ensure that I have a second camera in my kit bag. My natural reaction is to buy another 5dmkiii but the thing is I love landscape and if I was to get a second camera then a 5dsr may serve me better. I have read loads of reviews and articles and the impression I get is that a 5Dsr is obviously a great landscape camera but not the best choice for weddings. What would you go for?

Any advice appreciated.

Thanks in advance

 

[minnnt]

5DSR.

I'd stick to using the 5d3 for low light situations and probably the majority of the wedding but use the 5DSR for portraits with an 85mm of some description. Great IQ for that kind of stuff and better for landscaping.

Just my humble opinion.

 

[Gaz J]

Buy a 5D4!!

 

[Richmate]

5DSR.

I'd stick to using the 5d3 for low light situations and probably the majority of the wedding but use the 5DSR for portraits with an 85mm of some description. Great IQ for that kind of stuff and better for landscaping.

Just my humble opinion.

Thanks David, Thats a possible solution, would the 5dsr not be suitable for more general use at a wedding such as group shots?

Buy a 5D4!!

Thanks Gary. Would love to but my budget wont stretch that far. I will be looking at the second hand market and i cant imagine many 5dmkiv appearing yet

 

[minnnt]

Oh yeah, it will be fab for most things.

 

[Richmate]

would the 5dsr not be suitable for more general use at a wedding such as group shots?

The 5dsr will obviously be fine for group shots, so let me rephrase this without me sounding quite as daft. Other than low light conditions would there be any other disadvantages to using a 5DSR rather than a 5dMK3 at a wedding.

Would be good to hear from any pro's that have experience with using a 5DSR at weddings.

Many Thanks

 

[or8it]

The 5dsr will obviously be fine for group shots, so let me rephrase this without me sounding quite as daft. Other than low light conditions would there be any other disadvantages to using a 5DSR rather than a 5dMK3 at a wedding.

Would be good to hear from any pro's that have experience with using a 5DSR at weddings.

Many Thanks

Not me but Chris Giles gives a very good review (although he has upgraded to 5D IV recently by the look of it)

http://chrisgilesphotography.com/blog/?s=5dsr

 

[odd jim]

The 5dsr will obviously be fine for group shots, so let me rephrase this without me sounding quite as daft. Other than low light conditions would there be any other disadvantages to using a 5DSR rather than a 5dMK3 at a wedding.

Would be good to hear from any pro's that have experience with using a 5DSR at weddings.

Many Thanks

I'd say the file sizes of the 5ds/r would be something to bear in mind, given the amount of shots to be potentially taken at a wedding, not just with regards to card capacity but time taken to download and process also.

 

[HoppyUK]

Buy a 5D4!!

Is the obvious answer.

Problem with the 5DS/R is massive file sizes that are rarely needed, and on a wedding shoot you will have hundreds of images, even a couple of thousand. It's a serious issue, especially if you go beyond basic edits, needing a very high spec PC.

 

[Gadget-Guy]

Wouldnt a second hand 1DX now be a fairly similar price range?

When i had a 5DSR file size and high ISO handling put me off keeping it.

Only negative i could see for a 1DX would be weight as its built like a tank but an incredible camera other than that.

 

[Gaz J]

Whichever camera you buy is an expensive proposition. Given that your going to be earning money from it for, hopefully, quite some time the extra cost of the 5D4 would possibly be worth it for the increased dynamic range over the 5DS/R at all ISOs.

Don't know anything about business but would you not be able to offset some of the cost against the business. There about £600 between the two. Taken over 2/3 years it doesn't seem that much really given the improvements.

 

[Richmate]

Not me but Chris Giles gives a very good review (although he has upgraded to 5D IV recently by the look of it)

http://chrisgilesphotography.com/blog/?s=5dsr

Thanks for the link Russ. I will have a read

I'd say the file sizes of the 5ds/r would be something to bear in mind, given the amount of shots to be potentially taken at a wedding, not just with regards to card capacity but time taken to download and process also.

Is the obvious answer.

Problem with the 5DS/R is massive file sizes that are rarely needed, and on a wedding shoot you will have hundreds of images, even a couple of thousand. It's a serious issue, especially if you go beyond basic edits, needing a very high spec PC.

Good points Jim and Rich. I can imagine it would be a nightmare processing 100's of such images.

Wouldnt a second hand 1DX now be a fairly similar price range?

When i had a 5DSR file size and high ISO handling put me off keeping it.

Only negative i could see for a 1DX would be weight as its built like a tank but an incredible camera other than that.

Ha, thanks Glen, now im even more confused. No seriously that is a good point though, never handled a 1d so would need to have a look into it

Whichever camera you buy is an expensive proposition. Given that your going to be earning money from it for, hopefully, quite some time the extra cost of the 5D4 would possibly be worth it for the increased dynamic range over the 5DS/R at all ISOs.

Don't know anything about business but would you not be able to offset some of the cost against the business. There about £600 between the two. Taken over 2/3 years it doesn't seem that much really given the improvements.

Thanks Gary, if i was buying from new then there wouldnt be much between them unfortunately im only buying second hand with a budget of 2500 max. Business is at its infancy so not earning a great deal yet

 

[Canon Bob]

Another approach to the 5DSR file size issue (for weddings) is to set up one card for full RAW and the second card for M-RAW (about 28Mp). You can then simply edit the smaller files but have the option to use the odd one or two larger ones if there's a special shot or two that merits the full resolution. When using it for landscapes you would have the benefit of a high resolution sensor and editing a small number of 50Mp+ files is not a big issue.

Bob

 

[Richmate]

Another approach to the 5DSR file size issue (for weddings) is to set up one card for full RAW and the second card for M-RAW (about 28Mp). You can then simply edit the smaller files but have the option to use the odd one or two larger ones if there's a special shot or two that merits the full resolution. When using it for landscapes you would have the benefit of a high resolution sensor and editing a small number of 50Mp+ files is not a big issue.

Bob

Thanks Bob. Any other quality issues other than a reduction in resolution when using M-Raw?

 

[Canon Bob]

There shouldn't be as it's the camera essentially performing the same action as a post process downsampling and the sensor data is still read as before. An M-RAW downsampled 5DSR capture has higher resolution than a 5DmkIII and is close to the full output of a 5DmkIV (if the optics are to be ignored)

Bob

 

[HoppyUK]

There is some debate about Canon's S-Raw and M-Raw not being quite what they seem. A couple of links:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4002827
https://photographylife.com/sraw-format-explained

 

[Canon Bob]

There is some debate about Canon's S-Raw and M-Raw not being quite what they seem. A couple of links:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4002827
https://photographylife.com/sraw-format-explained

Doug Kerr provided a quite detailed dissection last year...... http://dougkerr.net/Pumpkin/articles/sRaw.pdf ......well worth a read if you want to go beyond 'try it and see'

The point that I originally made was that the images could be saved in both formats simultaneously with recourse to the high resolution files only for those shots where the increase would prove beneficial.

Bob

 

[Richmate]

Thanks Bob and Rich. Must admit that after reading the links that im not sure about the whole M-raw approach. At the minute im still favouring a second mkiii. If only i could afford a mkiv ☺

 

[Canon Bob]

Thanks Bob and Rich. Must admit that after reading the links that im not sure about the whole M-raw approach. At the minute im still favouring a second mkiii. If only i could afford a mkiv ☺

You've got a MkIII that will output M-RAW so why not temporarily set it up to store both versions and then see what the processing gives you?

Bob

 

[Richmate]

You've got a MkIII that will output M-RAW so why not temporarily set it up to store both versions and then see what the processing gives you?

Bob

Good point. I will do just that. Thanks Bob

 

[HoppyUK]

Doug Kerr provided a quite detailed dissection last year...... http://dougkerr.net/Pumpkin/articles/sRaw.pdf ......well worth a read if you want to go beyond 'try it and see'

The point that I originally made was that the images could be saved in both formats simultaneously with recourse to the high resolution files only for those shots where the increase would prove beneficial.

Bob

Good link Bob, thanks. Doug Kerr is usually very thorough but he seems lukewarm, at best, about sRaw and mRaw. Though as he suggests in his summary, perhaps he is missing something.

That article was written some months after the introduction of the Canon 5DS and 5DS R, but he can't have used one and he makes no reference to processing times, only storage capacity that, I agree, is something of a non-issue these days (or at least quite cheaply resolved). I've used a 5DS R a lot (on loan) and with my decent (I think) PC and broadband connect, if I really went to town with multiple edits on an image, Lightroom would run very slowly and, eventually, just freeze completely. Then when uploading hi-res JPEGs to the client, a normal set of maybe 30 images would crash their system and they had to go a max of five at a time.

I needed best quality so never tried sRaw or mRaw, but for a lot of my other work, sRaw's ability to halve the file size for a quarter the resolution (still 12-13mp on a 5DS R) would be more than adequate and very handy indeed. And if that can be done while also retaining the max quality files by configuring different outputs to the dual card slots, as Bob suggests, then I'd jump at it.

Or, having not actually tried it myself, am I missing something too?

 

[Canon Bob]

Good link Bob, thanks. Doug Kerr is usually very thorough but he seems lukewarm, at best, about sRaw and mRaw. Though as he suggests in his summary, perhaps he is missing something.

That article was written some months after the introduction of the Canon 5DS and 5DS R, but he can't have used one and he makes no reference to processing times, only storage capacity that, I agree, is something of a non-issue these days (or at least quite cheaply resolved). I've used a 5DS R a lot (on loan) and with my decent (I think) PC and broadband connect, if I really went to town with multiple edits on an image, Lightroom would run very slowly and, eventually, just freeze completely. Then when uploading hi-res JPEGs to the client, a normal set of maybe 30 images would crash their system and they had to go a max of five at a time.

I needed best quality so never tried sRaw or mRaw, but for a lot of my other work, sRaw's ability to halve the file size for a quarter the resolution (still 12-13mp on a 5DS R) would be more than adequate and very handy indeed. And if that can be done while also retaining the max quality files by configuring different outputs to the dual card slots, as Bob suggests, then I'd jump at it.

Or, having not actually tried it myself, am I missing something too?

I'm not sure what hardware you're using, Richard, but my (fairly basic) Dell i7, 16Gb laptop will perform basic processing on the filess from either the 5DSR or 645Z (both 50Mp) with LR6 or Topaz without crashing but some actions are certainly not instant as they are with the 1Dx files. A decent graphics processor with adequate onboard RAM certainly makes a difference.

Your mention of resolution......the M-RAW is effectively 75% whilst the S-RAW is 50% linear resolution (giving a file sile of 25% of the full RAW). However, the full 'resolution' assumes that the lens is giving sufficient detail and that's unlikely to be the case.....only the Zeiss 135/2 (a pre-Otus Otus) gets close from the lenses in my bag. A typical Canon wedding zoom (24-70/24-105/70-200MkII) is probably incapable of providing little more than half the sensor's recording capacity and the losses due to M-RAW (or even S-RAW) will be far less than the downsampling suggests.....although I appreciate that the final equation is not that simple in reality.

Bob

 

[HoppyUK]

I'm not sure what hardware you're using, Richard, but my (fairly basic) Dell i7, 16Gb laptop will perform basic processing on the filess from either the 5DSR or 645Z (both 50Mp) with LR6 or Topaz without crashing but some actions are certainly not instant as they are with the 1Dx files. A decent graphics processor with adequate onboard RAM certainly makes a difference.

Your mention of resolution......the M-RAW is effectively 75% whilst the S-RAW is 50% linear resolution (giving a file sile of 25% of the full RAW). However, the full 'resolution' assumes that the lens is giving sufficient detail and that's unlikely to be the case.....only the Zeiss 135/2 (a pre-Otus Otus) gets close from the lenses in my bag. A typical Canon wedding zoom (24-70/24-105/70-200MkII) is probably incapable of providing little more than half the sensor's recording capacity and the losses due to M-RAW (or even S-RAW) will be far less than the downsampling suggests.....although I appreciate that the final equation is not that simple in reality.

Bob

Not sure those file sizes are the right way around. Half linear res (file size) means quarter area res (pixels).

The Canon 5DS/R handbook puts a full Raw at 50 mega-pixels = 60 mega-bytes, mRaw at 28mp = 44mb, and sRaw at 12mp = 30mb. That fits with my understanding of Doug Kerr's article. In other words, sRaw knocks the pixel count down to a quarter from 50mp to 12mp, but only reduces the file size by half. mRaw is midway between the two, but hardly seems worth bothering with.

I take your point about lens sharpness, and it is certainly not easy to max out a 5DSR, but it can be done. I used it in a lens test for DPReview on a Canon 100-400 MkII and amongst a selection of very sharp pictures, there's one here https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/upgrading-a-classic-canon-100-400mm-f4-5-5-6l-is-usm-mark-ii-review that is noteworthy for measurable detail - scroll down to the mini gallery (guy with guitar) and there are four images, including one of a flamingo. What's interesting is there's a fly on the bird's bill, and I noticed that on the original file the finest veins on the fly's wings can be clearly discerned at only a little over 1-pixel wide.* You can see them well enough there in the 100% view mode (click on image).

What I found with the 5DSR and 100-400 MkII, plus a couple of other very good quality lenses, is you can max out the sensor at a) optimum apertures, b) fast enough shutter speeds, and c) perfect focus. But the point for me is, unless you output images at huge size - like a print at least a metre wide viewed very close up - the detail is just too small to see. Incidentally, when that flamingo image is viewed in 100% mode, it's enlarged 10x and on my monitor that equates to a print more than 10ft across.

*Edit: If you look very closely at that fly, I think it's fractionally in front of the plane of sharpest focus that is further up the bill and eye. Just goes to show how extremely critical everything becomes when seeking ultimate quality. Depth of field doesn't really exist!

 

[Jayst84]

Personally I'm not too interested in the subtleties, but I do use mRaw (on my 5DmkIIIs) for most things most of the time. For the majority of event and wedding photography, any difference in absolute quality / accuracy isn't noticeable. But the time saved when shifting thousands of files around, and processing them, certainly is.

As a matter of fact, I'm typing this as I wait for a pile of full size raw files to download from a USB stick. I'd be editing them by now if my contract photographer had remembered to shoot mRaw like I asked.