Heading back to Canon and need assistance

[SnappingShark]

As much as I love my Fuji, I feel it lacks some dynamic range when in a scene where conditions are heavily varied. Also, the grain is pretty noticeable on longer exposures and lower light situations.

So, I am jumping back to Canon soon ... but first, a decision and am kind of torn and need your help!

Canon 5D Mk IV vs Waiting for EOS R to be released properly.

Weight
800g for the IV and 660g for the R. A 140g difference - is it worth it?

Firmware
The R needs firmware updating, that much is clear and will be coming in a few months. Where as the IV is pretty much now a solid all rounder.

Viewfinder
I'd like the OVF in the R so I can see my exposures - but at the same time, do I NEED it? Ugh. I love it on my Fujis.

Cost
Cost wise, I'll be spending about the same as I'd be buying grey market IV.
The initial cost of the R is slightly less, but the newer lenses are more expensive - unless I use the adapter and EF lenses.

Lenses
I would be shooting with a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 f/4 (so this kind of rules out the NEW lenses cost)

My thoughts
I'm kind of 55/45 towards the R.

I'll be shooting landscapes, portraits, and occasional local events.

So, what are your thoughts on pros and cons of each?
Future-proof myself and go with the R or stay steady with the IV?

 

[Derrel]

SNIP>> dynamic range when in a scene where conditions are heavily varied. Also, the grain is pretty noticeable on longer exposures and lower light situations.

Do you already own the 24-70mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/4 Canon mount lenses? If not, this might be a great time to look into a full-frame Nikon that will have industry-leading dynamic range, ISO invariability, and incredible star- and night-photography potential. I know the Canon 5D Mark IV is a good camera, but the Nikon D810 is an incredible camera; one that got famous Canon-boosters Tony and Chelsea Northrup to switch from Canon to Nikon, because of the staggeringly capable sensor technology that the D810 offered and which their 5D-III's did not offer.

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV vs Nikon D810 vs Canon EOS 5D Mark III | DxOMark

I dunno...I bought a full Canon system to go with my Nikon gear back in the 2006-era...L-lenses, three of them, five primes,flash, an FF and an APS-C body...but once Nikon got into amazing sensor technology, there was no way I wanted to shoot Canon any longer. However, the 5D IV has gotten closer to Nikon's FX camera sensors.

Still, between the 5D IV and the newly-announced EOS R mirrorless; I think future-proofing is with the 5D system, not the R system. Right now, and for a while, the Canon EF lens mount has more options, by far. The R-mount lenses are few, and two are hugely heavy. I'm not sure how well the three lens adapters Canon will offer will perform with adapted EF lenses.

Pro's and Con's: I like to buy clean,used camera bodies,and save a lot of money. The used market for 5D-III and 5D-IV bodies has a lot of cameras for sale at decent prices. The EOS R is all-new. The lenses right now are 4 in number, and the 28-70mm f/2.0 (SIC) weights 3.15 pounds and costs $3,000 and the 50mm f/1.2 weighs like two pounds and costs $2,229, for a 50mm prime lens. I do not think the EOS R system is really "ready" yet. I think the 5D Mark IV is the smarter,better choice right now, and maybe for the next two to three years.

 

[TCampbell]

My only hesitation on an EOS R is that it was only just announced. I think it's technically in pre-order status. Very few people have actually tested it. It sounds great "on paper" ... and hopefully it lives up to expectations.

The 5D IV is more of a known quantity.

I'll address a few comments Derrel made.

Tony & Chelsea do own some Nikon gear ... but they've made it clear they also own, and still use, Canon gear. They specifically did an episode on this and the net of it was that you have to also consider the lenses.

The 5D IV picked up about 2 stops of DR over the 5D III ... it was good bump. There's not a lot of difference between that and a D810. Canon's DR doesn't drop quite as quickly as Nikon's when you increase ISO. If DR is a thing you worry about, the D810 only has better DR at ISO 100... by a small amount. As soon as you come off ISO 100, things change. They are equal at ISO 200, and the 5D IV is ahead of the D810 at all other ISOs.

On the topic of night/star photography... this one is a bit more complicated.

Nikon, like Sony, "cooks" their RAW images. They both have a "star eater" problem in that their efforts to get better low-noise results at higher ISOs means they de-noise their RAWs. This, unfortunately, means they eliminate *actual* stars from the image that the camera suspects might just be noise. The issue is well-known and documented among astrophotographers (you can find numerous articles on it).

The D810a is an exception. It's a special version of the D810 that is modified and optimized for astrophotography work. It doesn't cook the RAWs (so it doesn't have the star-eater problem) but that also means it doesn't get the sensor scores of the D810. It also swaps the standard filter which trims light transmission to the sensor toward something that approximates what human eyes see ... for a filter that allows much more reds so that it picks up a lot more detail in emission nebulae near the Hydrogen-alpha emission band. (human eyes are only maybe 20-25% sensitive to this light but AP cameras try to allow as much as possible to pass through to record more red detail in night sky photography ... think "horsehead nebula", "rosette nebula", and many other deep sky nebulae that are rich in hydrogen.)

The D810a's sensor scores are a much closer match to the older Canon 5D III. I tried to find a link, but I've noticed DxO seems to have dumped all their data on the D810a.

Anyway, back to the original question...

How soon do you want to make a move? Is this something you can put off for a few months until the EOS R makes it into enough hands that there are lots of reports, reviews, and examples that you can check out before making the decision?

I'm not overly worried about using an EF lens adapter on the R series body... because mostly the back-focus distance is different. (Camera "extension tubes" basically just change back-focus distance and this changes the focus range of the lens. Canon DSLRs use a 44mm back-focus distance so the most important thing the "adapter" has to do... is mount the lens so that it has a 44mm back-focus distance otherwise the focus range wont match what the lens was designed to provide.)

I would be more hesitant to actually *buy* new EF lenses for an R body. But if you've already got the lenses on-hand... then use an adapter.

 

[Derrel]

See for yourself...

Canon 5D Mark IV brings dramatic dynamic range improvements to the 5D line

Spend 15 minutes.

"Nikon cooks their raws". A frequently-alleged comment, and it appears in this thread, but the allegation is unproven.


"The 5D Mark IV shows significant improvements in exposure latitude thanks to its increased dynamic range. After a 5 EV push, it's well ahead of the 5DS which, despite its old sensor design with off-chip analog-to-digital conversion, was already 2/3 EV ahead of the 5D Mark III (which we cover in-depth on the next page). That places the 5D IV well ahead of its predecessor, nearly catching up to the excellent Sony a7R II. Despite its improvements, it's not at the level of the current industry leader, the Nikon D810, nor even the best APS-C cameras. After a 6 EV push, the 5D Mark IV falls further behind the a7R II and D810, but the improvement over the 5DS is pretty dramatic.

Digging a bit deeper: the 5D IV shows improvements over the 5DS with even more moderate 3-4 EV pushes, but especially so when files are pushed 5-6 EV. This means you'll see the advantages of the on-chip ADC in the form of less noise not just with drastic exposure adjustments, but even more moderate ones. Results are about on par with, if not slightly better than, the 1D X II. And while the 5D IV falls just slightly short of the Sony a7R II, the differences are really only visible after fairly extreme pushes."



Differences against the current dynamic range market-leader, the D810, start becoming apparent after even a 3 EV push, and fairly significant after a 6 EV push. The D810 can perform so well because of even lower read noise, and increased sensor capacity for light at ISO 64 that gives its files a nearly medium format-esque quality."

Cough,cough,cough..."Nikon cooks their raw files". Sure they do....

 

[SnappingShark]

I went with the 5D Mk IV yesterday after trading in my Fuji gear, I got a little more than I expected, so thought I would get that.

Super happy with it so far - low light at 12800 is almost noiseless!
Sure it's heavier, but at the same time, it's tried and tested in the field vs the EOS R.

Thanks @Derrel and @TCampbell for your inputs - I appreciate them both!

 

[TCampbell]

See for yourself...

Canon 5D Mark IV brings dramatic dynamic range improvements to the 5D line

Spend 15 minutes.

"Nikon cooks their raws". A frequently-alleged comment, and it appears in this thread, but the allegation is unproven.


"The 5D Mark IV shows significant improvements in exposure latitude thanks to its increased dynamic range. After a 5 EV push, it's well ahead of the 5DS which, despite its old sensor design with off-chip analog-to-digital conversion, was already 2/3 EV ahead of the 5D Mark III (which we cover in-depth on the next page). That places the 5D IV well ahead of its predecessor, nearly catching up to the excellent Sony a7R II. Despite its improvements, it's not at the level of the current industry leader, the Nikon D810, nor even the best APS-C cameras. After a 6 EV push, the 5D Mark IV falls further behind the a7R II and D810, but the improvement over the 5DS is pretty dramatic.

Digging a bit deeper: the 5D IV shows improvements over the 5DS with even more moderate 3-4 EV pushes, but especially so when files are pushed 5-6 EV. This means you'll see the advantages of the on-chip ADC in the form of less noise not just with drastic exposure adjustments, but even more moderate ones. Results are about on par with, if not slightly better than, the 1D X II. And while the 5D IV falls just slightly short of the Sony a7R II, the differences are really only visible after fairly extreme pushes."



Differences against the current dynamic range market-leader, the D810, start becoming apparent after even a 3 EV push, and fairly significant after a 6 EV push. The D810 can perform so well because of even lower read noise, and increased sensor capacity for light at ISO 64 that gives its files a nearly medium format-esque quality."

Cough,cough,cough..."Nikon cooks their raw files". Sure they do....

#1 ... The D810 and the D810a are the same camera with the exception of the which filter they use and the firmware. The D810a compares more closely with a Canon 5D III ... BECAUSE the D8i10a doesn’t cook the RAWs.

#2 ... Shoot a RAW at base ISO. Read the image and calculate the mean bias value for the chip and the standard deviation. When you apply gain (ISO boost), the boost is applied AFTER the camera shutter is closed (there’s no such thing as changing the sensitivity of the imaging sensor). I.e. double the ISO then you double the gain. Double the gain and all values should also double and that means the mean and standard deviation SHOULD mathematically follow along in linear fashion.... except they don’t. That’s not mathematically possibly unless you “cook” the RAW data.

 

[beagle100]

As much as I love my Fuji, I feel it lacks some dynamic range when in a scene where conditions are heavily varied. Also, the grain is pretty noticeable on longer exposures and lower light situations.

So, I am jumping back to Canon soon ... but first, a decision and am kind of torn and need your help!

Canon 5D Mk IV vs Waiting for EOS R to be released properly.

Weight
800g for the IV and 660g for the R. A 140g difference - is it worth it?

Firmware
The R needs firmware updating, that much is clear and will be coming in a few months. Where as the IV is pretty much now a solid all rounder.

Viewfinder
I'd like the OVF in the R so I can see my exposures - but at the same time, do I NEED it? Ugh. I love it on my Fujis.

Cost
Cost wise, I'll be spending about the same as I'd be buying grey market IV.
The initial cost of the R is slightly less, but the newer lenses are more expensive - unless I use the adapter and EF lenses.

Lenses
I would be shooting with a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 f/4 (so this kind of rules out the NEW lenses cost)

My thoughts
I'm kind of 55/45 towards the R.

I'll be shooting landscapes, portraits, and occasional local events.

So, what are your thoughts on pros and cons of each?
Future-proof myself and go with the R or stay steady with the IV?

wait and see
I use the older Canon mirrorless APS-C ..... works great
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

 

[photoflyer]

Interesting conundrum: "old" technology with the 5D mark IV or bleeding edge EOS R. If it were me, I would go to a camera shop that had both and put each through its paces. When you spend that kind of money, what's a couple hundred dollars in price to get what is right for you.