5DS-R vs 5D Mk IV: On the Fence

[GreggS]

I'm hoping to reach out specifically to people who have experience using both of these cameras. I currently have a Canon 80D and I love it, and I do wish to stay with Canon as opposed to Nikon or even Sony...but the 80D is an APS-C frame, and I'm looking to upgrade to full frame. I've done a lot of research on both the 5DSR and the 5D Mark IV, but I'm still on the fence between the two. Here's a little bit about the photography I like to do for fun, and which I'm trying to focus my fledgling business on. Looking for genuine suggestions on which way to go.

In order of my own priorities:
-Landscapes: from what I know, the 5DSR has the edge for resolution and thus ability to make large prints. But can the 5D Mk IV perform just as well?
-Commercial Photography: I am doing some work for clients by way of macro shots (foot, etc.) and wider angle interior real estate. Does either of these bodies excel in this area?
-Portrait: Mainly on-site, but some studio portrait work. Again, resolution goes the 5DSR, but would I really have a practical use for 50.6MP for such work?
-Sports: I don't do a lot of sports photography, however I may on occasion shoot marathon runners, or my kid's games. The 5D Mk IV has slightly better FPS, but would I be at a disadvantage with the 5DSR?

What I'm not looking for is Canon bashers or general forum bullying (you know who you are). Thanks ahead of time for looking. Also, if you care to give me C&C on my portfolio, I'd be happy to hear it. I've implemented some changes suggested by TPF members already and they were great. www.blue-line-photography.com

 

[weepete]

Ok, I've not shot with either so you may want to dismiss what I'm going to say out of hand. That's up to you but I was seriously considering buying a 5DSR myself so spent quite a bit of time looking into it and the 5Dmkiv.

To me the 5DSR is a specialist tool and it excels at big images but is limited by that 6,400 ISO limit. That for me makes it a brilliant landscape and studio camera where you'd normally limit ISO anyway for better IQ (and like a cheap entry into medium format size digital). As a portrait camera probably the 5DS would be better as the anti aliasing filter would make rendering skin tones better SOOC.

The 5Dmkiv is a modern, generalist camera. Still got the 30mpx for big images but you get an ISO limit of 32,000.

So to me if landscapes or shooting high res product shots are your thing then the 5DSR is the one to get. If you expect to be shooting anything else then the 5Dmkiv is the one to get as you will be able to leverage the bigger ISO range.

 

[GreggS]

Thanks for the input. I'm leaning that way too after giving it more thought all day, as landscapes and portraits are where I spend most of my time. The price point also helps. I also enjoy street photography and am hoping it will perform well there. The price point helps too. The only concern I would have is sports.


Sent from my iPhone using ThePhotoForum.com mobile app

 

[Juga]

Why not save a 'buck' and go with the 5D Mk III? It is a very nice camera and now at an excellent price because of the updated models and will easily make large prints that you desire.

 

[jsecordphoto]

5d4 has better dynamic range for landscapes, 5dsR has more mp. I'd personally go for the 5d4 (if I shot canon) because having 50 megapixels doesn't matter to me if the dynamic range isn't there. How big do you really print? 30mp is plenty for ~24x36 and even 40x60 if your technique is good.

 

[beagle100]

I'd also go with a 5D4

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[ronlane]

I haven't shot either of these cameras but do shoot canon and try to keep up with the full frame offerings for when the time is right for me to move up.

The 50mp's of the 5DsR would be nice but will take up tons of room on hard drives. But hey, those are cheap, right... There has been some talk about a new firmware release coming soon for the 5DmkIV, which is to help some of the issues that people have been complaining about.

It may be worth holding on until that firmware is released and some reviews come out about it before making your decision.

For landscape, I think either camera would do a great job (is the 5DsR the one with no high-pass filter? I don't remember).

For sports, it would depend on the lighting conditions of the "field of play". If you were outdoor soccer on Saturdays, I'm sure that it would be fine. Just think of the crop ability of a 50mp file.

@Juga does bring up a good suggestion. The 5D mk III is a good all-around camera and could shoot any of that with not too much problems.

Good luck.

 

[chuasam]

the IV. The dS and DsR are horrific in even middle ISO PERFORMANCE.

 

[weepete]

is the 5DsR the one with no high-pass filter? I don't remember

Yeah Ron. The 5DS-R is the one without the filter. Possibly more moire but better sharpness. I'd still go with the MkIV personally but can't deny that high res has a pull.

 

[beagle100]

is the 5DsR the one with no high-pass filter? I don't remember

Yeah Ron. The 5DS-R is the one without the filter. Possibly more moire but better sharpness. I'd still go with the MkIV personally but can't deny that high res has a pull.

right, having a high res pixel model is nice but for commercial, portrait, etc. a 5D4 with L lens is probably better for the OP

 

[chuasam]

is the 5DsR the one with no high-pass filter? I don't remember

Yeah Ron. The 5DS-R is the one without the filter. Possibly more moire but better sharpness. I'd still go with the MkIV personally but can't deny that high res has a pull.

Actually it has a filter. It's a self cancelling filter. Yes I know. Stupid right?
It's a barely usable megapixel monkey.
Get the IV.

 

[Derrel]

No longer an active Canon user (still own my old 20D and my mirror-glue-failed-and the-mirror-fell-off-the-mirror-thingamajig 5D Classic), but if I wanted a generalist Full-Frame Canon of the newest generation...

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Digital SLR Camera Body

 

[beagle100]

is the 5DsR the one with no high-pass filter? I don't remember

Yeah Ron. The 5DS-R is the one without the filter. Possibly more moire but better sharpness. I'd still go with the MkIV personally but can't deny that high res has a pull.

Actually it has a filter. It's a self cancelling filter. Yes I know. Stupid right?

Get the IV.

"self cancelling filter" ... sounds ominous (except if you use video)
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[AndyG]

I just pulled the trigger on a 5DIV over the 5DSR. Upgrading from a 7D. Still keeping the 7D though.

 

[TCampbell]

I just pulled the trigger on a 5DIV over the 5DSR. Upgrading from a 7D. Still keeping the 7D though.

Gratz on your selection. I'm sure you'll be very happy with it.

I've owned the 5D II, 5D III, and 5D IV (still have the III & IV). A friend owns the 5Dsr but I haven't shot with it.

There is both a 5Ds and a 5Dsr. The "r" version removes the anti-aliasing filter. The cameras are otherwise identical. But the filter's job is to reduce any effects of moiré -- usually caused by patterns in (mostly) man-made objects... such as certain clothing patterns, or brick patterns, etc. I was checking out your portfolio and for the most part I didn't see you shooting the types of subjects where moiré tends to be a problem, so you'd have probably been fine with that choice.

But the key difference between the 5Dsr and 5D IV is that the IV is the newest generation and has substantially better ISO performance and dynamic range. It's a 30MP camera (and that's a lot. There's an argument that once you pass about 18MP it gets hard to notice that the images are getting better. Sure you can grab your magnifying loupe and pixel peep to notice the difference, but these are not difference most people viewing your work would ever notice. So even with 30MP... you've still got quite a lot of detail.

The 5Dsr doesn't have great ISO performance nor great dynamic range. But that's not it's sweet spot. It's meant for the person who can take all the time in the world to capture the perfect shot. Think "use it on a tripod" and "bring your lighting" or shoot several HDR shots (at low ISO) to create the dynamic range. In those situations, ISO performance and even dynamic range isn't really a major issue. It's not meant for situations where you need to shoot on-the-fly. It's meant to use in the sort of situations where a film photographer might consider using a "view camera" with sheet film. Those cameras could capture staggeringly high detail... but take more effort to set everything up for just one shot.

For best results... feed your new high resolution sensor camera lots of high quality glass. ;-)