Discover unlimited Magazines & Newspapers all in one app Click the link below and start your free 6-week trial readly.me/garygough21 tinyurl.com/cndrbz8e
Every single person looking at upgrading/changing cameras should listen carefully to your summary and apply your thought process. Nailed it when you stressed the type of photography you do and intend to use the new camera for. Horses for courses, it really is as simple as that but often we find it difficult to ignore the noise of sales hype. One point I'd like to make about when you pushed the files from under North Pier, whilst I accept there is no way under normal shooting situations we would ever push a single fie that far there is a certain degree of reassurance in knowing you CAN, it gives confidence in the kit you are using and this should not be underestimated. I have recently bought a Nikon D850 to replace the Nikon D750 and the increased dynamic range really blew me away, will I ever use it? highly unlikely as a landscape photographer, was it comforting to know I could? As a hobbyist, yes. Thank you for another superb real-life test, you really did put so much into this one.
Apart from the obvious bells and whistles on the R5 and R6, I have found some unexpected benefits of going mirrorless. As an older photographer I found myself struggling with carrying the weight of the 5dmk4 and tripod. The R6 is lighter and IBIS allows me to use lower shutter speeds without always having to lug the tripod. Additionally, setting all the parameters so that I can control them whilst looking through the viewfinder means I don't have to keep taking my glasses on and off - I can control and review images through the view finder. It doesn't sound much but I have found it has really helped me to enjoy my photography again.
@@GaryGough I am with you there BUT.... I found out a new pair of glasses that allows me to see far away as well as short distance without having to take them off are about $300. This is far less expensive than a $4000 upgrade just for that feature. But yes, I am taking my glasses off every 2 minutes until my new pair of glasses arrive on the mail and it is extra annoying. :-) By the way, your video is by far the best ever made on that topic and trust me, I have watched them all.
Now it's 2023 and the 5dsr can be had used for $1000 in excellent condition. The R5 is about $3000 new. For 1/3 the cost it's got me thinking about picking up the 5Dsr. What does everyone else think?
@@Stop-All-War Haven't found a 5Dsr so now I am thinking about a used 5D Mark IV. Although I would love to have an R5 or R6 Mark II as an amatuer it is hard to justify.
@@garfgo I got an R6 mki and honestly, its so overkill. I like the accuracy of the light metering though. I got it for birds andbit does spendidly for that, but its totally silly for lanscape unless you can find a hell of a deal. The ibis is nice too, but a stabilized lens gives way more bang for buck for sure. If I didn't get into birds I wouldn't have gone for this camera at all. Occasionally I use my 2005 5D to remind me that gear doesnt matter. I can barely tell the difference between them on a good photo. At a reasonable enlargement, only 12.7mp. The 5DS&R are fantastic if you wanna do big prints. More dynamic range at base iso but if you use a tripod.. just bracket for more dynamic range than any camera in one shot. Plus, I find the ultra raised shadows kind of gaudy. A screen or print is 6 stops or less.
I moved up the the Canon 5DSR in 2016 from my older 5DMk2. The 5DSR is a superb camera and I'm completely satisfied with the image quality. I only shoot Landscapes and can compensate for some shortfall in dynamic range by exposure bracketing & using graduated filters.... simple. The arguments around the mirrorless camera world is weight, that is quite ridiculous indeed! Put the Canon f2.8 70 - 200 USM Mk2 on the either body and its going to be heavy, the glass is heavy, high quality. Good glass & 50 million pixels you get a sharp image if you do all the other things needed: stable camera, appropriate shutter speed, focus correctly. The next Canon Camera that has 100meg sensor & medium format sensor, then I'll consider a change....maybe LOL!
A sincere opinion from a sincere man. Words of wisdom from a real, not just a youtuber, pro photographer. People, please forget the pixel spotting forever. I don't want to recall now the words the great Ansel Adams said. Please go outside and enjoy photography with whatever camera you can afford! Thank you very much, Gary. You are an inspiration. All the best.
Great video Gary. I was able to grab a lightly used 5DSR with only 4,000 shots on it for $1k when people were unloading them last year to fund R5 purchases. I could not be happier and use it extensively for all of my photography videos. The fact that the 5DSR and R5 200% images are identical is remarkable.
5dsr is stunning camera. I brought a second hand one a couple of years back, unfortunately I made the mistake of selling it and buying a Nikon d850. The d850 is a great camera too but outside of the dynamic range I prefer the Canon system, all the Canon L glass I used was noticeably sharper than the Nikon equivalent especially corner performance.
Good video. I do landscape and bird photography as well as some event photography. I have owned a 5DSr for several years. I also had a 5D MK IV which I traded for an R6. I agree that the 5DSr still does a remarkable job when hi-res is needed. The R6 is good for the other times. Your findings confirmed my experience.
Hello Gary. Greetings from WA State, USA! I found your video thru a search on the subject. I am very glad that I found your channel. This high quality professional grade informative video is one of the best ever I’ve seen on TH-cam. You convinced me that my mighty 5DSR is a keep for landscape photography. Thank you very much! Liked and subscribed.
@@GaryGough thank you Gary. Do you discuss post processing techniques on your channel? That’s an interesting topic to me and would love to learn from you.
First off Mk3 Canadian Landscape photographer that just got a 5Dsr a year back. I waited for years for the prices to come down on the camera that has become my workhorse. I LOVE THE THING! Your video was very timely and it helped me see the value of my present camera. Your video was a good check against the feelings of having to keep up with the joneses. Thanks from sunning Alberta!!
Loved the comparison and I think you have explained in much depth with very good proof. Also allowing members to download the files and see for themselves is also another bonus. Once again forever grateful of the knowledge, experience and content you share with us every week. Richie. X
I own a 5DSR, it is the single most incredibly befitting camera for my needs, and while using it for almost everything including landscapes, wildlife, nature, art, macro, sports, portraits and everything else, it is spectacular. The focus system is up for literally anything. i get all shots in focus for whatever i do, my focus rate is almost 100%. i am more than content with the fps. i dont understand who needs any more stops of dynamic range and for what purposes? who would intentionally underexpose that much? yes the high iso performance can sometimes be an issue, but i am ready to work around it and i understand why that would be an issue for some and the weight but they dont bother me. i dont like holding a mirrorless, its utterly unauthentic, and none of the newer models satisfy my needs. i love my 5DSR and my incredible collection of lenses with it. i dont shoot video, so its a perfect camera for me. excellent video, loved the summary hehe, cheers
Gary I can't tell you how much this video means to me! I am in this exact moment trying to decide between these 2 cameras. I agree with you 110%! I'm transitioning from a portrait to Landscape/Architectural photography. I'll be retiring in a few years and I am purchasing my last camera. Seeing these photos and comparing them, I have no need to go with the R5. The 5DSr is the camera for me. Thank you very much for this video! Your photography inspires me to push further into my craft and achieve these types of photographs on my own. Bravo Mr. Gough!
Thanks Gary, a great test and very interesting. I upgraded from a 5DII to the R, and apart from the obvious advantages of mirrorless, I'm not so sure that image quality actually improved. Sure, you get an extra 10Mp, but for landscape photography there is no call for heavy cropping. I didn't do any side-by-side comparisons, but I think, looking at my old landscape images with large texture variation, that the 5DII may have slightly better colour saturation. For action (birds) I still use my trusty old 7DII, and yes, the R5 would be fantastic, but as an armature, it's far too expensive, so am waiting for an R7. Great show.
I've been shooting landscapes and stills with the 5DMKII for over 11 years now and am finally considering an upgrade. I was looking closely at the 5DSR for a long time, but my attention was taken away by the mirrorless cameras. This video has been very helpful for me, as I am having trouble justifying the cost of the R5 compared to the older 5DSR.
One of your best videos Gary. I enjoy them all, but this one was worth your work, and redoing that closing as many times as you did was the right choice. Thx for keeping the tone straight - mind vs. heart - true need vs. desire. Well done. I also primarily focus on landscape and architecture, but play around with or at least have the desire to do more macro, pets, family shots and who knows what since this is only a hobby for me - nothing professional. I too don’t have a need for video today, but having more capabilities is plus in terms of hopefully allowing me to hang on to this body a little longer than I perhaps otherwise would. Be it personal computers or electronic/camera gear, I always try to buy a little more capability than I presently need, so it hopefully lasts me a little longer. I tend to leap frog technology changes vs. doing many perhaps more expensive incremental changes along the way. Besides using my iPhone 12 Pro that is always with me, I wanted to make the jump from my trusty 5DIII mirror to mirrorless one day. I only had those two cameras - one primarily for snaps when I’m out and about, the other when I want to focus on my hobby, bring out the good glass and perhaps the tripod. I’ve been watching and waiting in the wings as the mirrorless tech has been evolving. When the R5 came out, I consciously allowed my heart and desire to override my normal analytical ways, spending the extra cash for an R5 over a lesser mirrorless model that would have fit my needs today just as well. The R5 is much more than I need or presently use today, and like you, I would never recommend it feature/function/price-wise for someone that does only landscape. I’m glad to have made the switch to mirrorless and hopeful my R5 serves me well for years to come, with plenty of capabilities to explore beyond my core love of landscape and architecture. THX AGAIN for your great channel Gary.
Great video Gary I have an R5 but I agree with your conclusions, for LANDSCAPE photography it really is not worth the extra cost. For me, I shoot portraits and landscapes and wanted a camera that could excel in both disciplines....I'm not disappointed at all. Keep up the great work, always look forward to your videos.
Great video as always! Just a note on file size - they're varying so much due to what's actually in the frame - the more complex a scene is the higher the file size will be. If you fill the frame with a white sheet of paper followed by filling it with grass on your lawn, the lawn shot will have a considerably bigger file size due to the fact there's more detail in the image and thus more information needs to be stored in the file. File size even changes with ISO - the higher the ISO the larger the file size, this is because the noise itself in high ISO images needs to be stored within the file. You can see the effect of this if you look at the counter telling you how many images you have left on your card, as you increase ISO you'll see that number drop. Love your channel, your enthusiasm has certainly inspired me to keep going out with my camera over the last incredibly difficult 13 months so thank you for your efforts!
Hi Gary I have had the 5DSR for a few years now .. they are great cameras .. but you need a serious quality lens on the front or it will punish you for sharpness. I use a Zeiss distagon 15mm f2.8 . I had a canon 16/35f2.8 mkii which softened the resolution. So in low light the 5DSR is not the best . But when it all comes together the resolution is brilliant. I love my 5DSR . I don’t think in terms of resolution I don’t think the R5 is 3 times better for the money! Thanks for this comparison which no one to date I have seen do .I also have used my 5DSR for extensive wildlife.. with the canon 300mm f2.8 .. shutter speed must be high up over 1000 and when you get the sweet spot of that lens it’s a deadly combination. The one thing many people don’t realise is the quality of your lens determines the size of the image size . The higher the quality of lens the bigger the resolution files . I have jpg files bigger than 50mb from the 5DSR , these are single shot image files .
In theory, there is nothing you can't shoot with the 5DSr. It's about the whistles and bells that determines who the camera is targeted at. It obviously makes sense to buy a camera with a higher fire rate to shoot sport though. But as you said, it'll still be a great camera for wedding and wildlife etc. Cheers Ross 👍👍
I own 5dsr too and I'm totally agree with you. You need a better glass to experience the difference. I use 24-70 f/4 L lens most of the times. I sold my 24-105 f/4 L lens to switch to 24-70 and noticed the difference. The camera itself is very unforgiving if you are not careful with your shutter speed.
Spot on review Gary and beautifully articulated. I have had my 5DSr for a few year and had the chance to test it against the R5 extensively in the Dales a few weeks ago. Exactly the same conclusions for landscapes although I didn’t push the files as far as you did.
Thank you for introducing readly, I never knew what it was. I hope it worked using you link as I had to switch to Germany. I hope this helps to support you a little bit. I really like your channel and hope to see many more videos! Best regards from Germany! Tanja
I have been looking at a 5DSr because my R5 has been programmed to defocus third party lenses. Using my Sigma 120-300 f2.8 I get excellent results with my 5D4, but switching to the R5 only 20% are sharp. The 5D4 is excellent, only sometimes I want the cropping power of the R5. Primarily this is when using Sigma lenses, also 150-600, 150 macro, to ensure sharpness. Of course an alternative would be a Sony with an adapter but I don't want another system.
Thank you for this extensive review. I have a very large number of EF lenses and several cameras that use those lenses natively. While I understand I can purchase an adapter to continue to use those lenses on an R5, I hesitate because of my reluctance to use adapters of any sort. Maybe I am wrong in thinking this. I will soon be picking up two secondhand camera bodies (a 5DS and a 5DSR [they were so cheap it was just a spur of the moment decision to get both]) and this video has certainly cemented, in my mind, that I will not regret the decision to purchase them. (And, here in Australia, the R5 would be around 6 times the cost of both the 'new-to-me' bodies combined).
Nice and clean results! I recently sold my Nikon D750 and all the lenses I had. Upgraded to an Z6 mark II with only two lenses. So in a way I downgraded. Didn't cost me a whole lot, all the stuff fits in a much smaller bag and wheighs a lot less. The Z6 is a joy to use. I am happy. But will it make my pictures any better? No, I don't think so. The quality of my pics are in me and not in my gear....I totally agree with you: which goals do you expect from upgrading and what is that you need. See you next week!
Thats one excellent video Gary - no nonsense, just testing and saying it as it is - well done you. Personally I could never, ever justify that kind of money on a hobby but I still found the vid very interesting. Canon must be just aiming at you pro's with a tag like that, same as all the other brands. Us peasants are well and truly being ignored now.
Hi Gary, interestingly I made these comments on you Mk III vs R6 vid, (hadn't found this one then). In short my 5Ds does what you have shown and described perfectly here. Only additional observation was the apparent noise in the video, then I realised your shirt really is like that ;) Great job again, thank you! I'm a bit late commenting I know but the 5Ds means I still don't need to change.
Great Video Gary thank you so much. I'm in my early 60s and a very keen hobbyist who changed to the R5 as my first full frame from a 70D, which as you mentioned, was a huge leap forward. But the 5DRS was a camera I was also considering as a close friend of mine has the same camera and his images always looked fantastic when we compared after a Landscape shoot. The flexibility of the R5 for means I can use it for many other things other than Landscape like motor sport although shooting Landscape images is my first love.
There's just one reason I'd consider the R-series and it's the amazing mirrorless focussing ability, on moving subjects. Having eye-tracking focus is a game changer for portraits and weddings. It means you can concentrate on composition, and interaction with the subject, rather than constantly doing focus/recompose on the eyes. I can get this with a canon RP though, for about £800 (although the R6mk2 may be the R5 killer for me). It's 2023 and time for an R5mk2 ..... that may be the camera to rule them all.
This video has verified my original opinion of both of these cameras. As a real estate/architecture and landscape photographer, there's absolutely no way I could ever justify spending $3,700 for a 45mp body vs spending $1,500 for a 50mp. I already own a Canon EOS R 30mp body with which I'm pleased, and have previously owned a 5DS r (which I regret having sold). I appreciate your well balanced analyses of these cameras and the fact that you've provided a clear understanding of their use in your style of photography. I've just come upon this video and have decided to subscribe to your channel. I look forward to viewing more of your videos. Thank you.
@@rickigoode8536 I find the EOS. R to be very capable in terms of photographic quality. It is substantively different from the 5DS and 5DSr in terms of megapixels, however its 30.2 mp sensor is superior in dynamic range. Another benefit of the EOS R vs the 5DS and 5DSr is its articulating touch screen which is a great asset. And if you’re into video, it also shoots 4k, although with a substantial 1.6 crop. The EOS R’s lack of a 2nd card slot doesn’t mean anything to me because of what and how I shoot. That said, it may be a drawback for a run-and-gun photographer who shoots weddings or other live-action events, like sports. Finally, the price is also very accommodating, especially if when buying used, as I did. Hope this info is helpful.
@@kennethjonesphotography Thank you. These have been what I have also established in research, so I don't feel I get any better or worse through changing the 5ds to an R personally. The R also wouldn't be a suitable replacement of my 1dx or 7dii for sports and wildlife action either, as seem to miss shots on lesser FPS. I still need to try one for a few days though. Where do you display your work?
Thanks, a no nonsense well done video. Very professional and informing. I had the same questions but you hit it right on the head and discussed it as a seasoned photographer. So refreshing, well done.
HI Gary, thanks a lot for the video, the great effort and the availability of the images to test. I made a noise technical analysis using common photography software. It is not how it should be done to be conclusive but the orders of magnitude of the results will be close to the real solution. I took the two images of the under exposed peer from CR2 and CR3 files and increased the shadows +100 in ACR. Then on PS a gauss filter was applied to remove high frequency response (usually associated with noise). Then the filtered image was subtracted from the original one and the results exported as a new document. Finally the mean of the subtraction and the amount of "noisy" pixels were counted. By doing this the results were approximately the following: CR2 file has 12% more noise and 6% more intensity in the noise (possibility to perceive it). This can be done using more specialized tools but also will required more controlled original image parameters. Bottom line: CR2 is noisier, but is the CR3 files almost 4K$ "cleaner"? For web consuming even in 4K displays may be no. For high end printing product/fashion/art/wildlife when for some reason you have this contrast and under exposed situations? May be yes.
Blimey, that's pretty technical stuff :) I just use my eyes 😁😁 Sometimes I'm glad I'm not interested in the techy side 😁😁 Cheers for the explanation xx
Strangely, but not sure if its just the white balance, the 5DSR here looked like it had more color information in the rusty iron, the R5 was greener and flatter looking.
I used the RF lenses on the R6 comparison video. The difference is marginal. The EF 16-35mm lens is super sharp. The difference between the lenses was minimal. Cheers Mark
I appreciate the time and effort you put into this. I've got an R5 but I saw that the 5DS R was on sale right now for only $1500 US. It sold new for about $4000. At $1500, I thought it would make a great every day camera so that I wasn't wearing out my brand new R5 on unimportant stuff and it will also let me keep running my EF glass a few more years at least. My 1DX is getting long in the tooth and has seen lots of use. It's going to give up the ghost any day now. It seems from this video that $1500 is a steal for the 5DSR considering the image quality it has. Sure, the R5 may outperform it a bit a the extremes, but like you say, I rarely find myself in those situations. If and when I do, I can always bring out the R5. And the bonus is my R5 uses the same exact battery as the 5DS R and I've got 8 of them waiting to be use. Thanks to your video, this choice seems to be a no-brainer.
Thank You ! Thank You ! Thank You ! Gary ...what a brilliant comparison, and thank you Colin for lending Gary the means of doing his usual 'From the heart' blogs. Extremely impressive and professional presentation , packed with great information. I've followed you for a long time, sadly not seen much (my fault) since you left podcasting with 'the boys' ...I'm back in the saddle - Looking forward to catching up ...Keep up the GREAT work
Thank you Gary! I also have a 5diii and was waiting, as you were, for the 5dv that didn't happen. I am really grateful for your video which reiterated my own thoughts and helped me cut through the hype and confusion to make that final upgrading decision. Again thank you.
5DS/R is such a great camera - even after all those years. Hugely underrated when it came out. Best Canon sensor until the release of the 5R. I'm moving to mirrorless myself for the high MPIX action shots, but for landscapes it makes perfect sense to stay with the 5DS/R.
thank you for this comparison. I use a number of manual focus lenses. Have you had a chance to use focus peaking? I would like to know if there is a great improvement in using this with mirrorless cameras in terms of accuracy. than you again
I currently have a 5D Mark IV and have been thinking about either the R6 or R5. If the only thing I did was Landscape photography, I would not be considering an upgrade as my 5D4 is fantastic at that. However, I also like to do Bird photography and sports, which is a big reason why I'm considering the upgrade. The R5 and R6 AF system with eye detect is the main reason. The 20FPS is a nice added benefit but not my primary reason.
Have you considered keeping your 5D4 for landscapes? and then buy an R7 for Wildlife & Sports - which is where it shines (plus uncropped 4K). You can use all your EF lenses using the adapter. The money saved would allow investment in a decent sports/wildlife RF lens like the RF 100-500mm.
Would love to buy the R5 but the R7 is a crop censor. Nothing wrong with crop sensors btw for everything except Wedding Photography. I would have to utilise the camera for Wedding Photography too so it just wouldn't work. Fantastic camera to vlog with though 👍👍
@@GaryGough That is an interesting comment about R7 not working for weddings. Another photographer I follow on TH-cam Ian Worth uses Fuji X-T3s (APC crop sensor) for his wedding photography and portrait photography business. Horses for courses I suppose.
Comments on relationship between MegaPixels and file size for the CanonRaw files has already been made. Absolute uncompressed raw files would be 2 to 3 times the size. As a purely Landscape camera, you are probably right. The R5 offers little more for the money for that genre. However, few of us use our cameras for just one type of photography. As you rightly say, the autofocus in the R5 and also the video features provide an incredibly competent all-round camera. Those features are streets ahead. The RF glass is a step up in quality too.
Such a truthful evaluation. Thank you Gary.. You have most certainly earned the respect and trust of those that use this equipment and have enlightend us as to how we should approach the future... Thank you again....so much. Best wishes 2 U.
Absolutely nailed it Gary. Digital cameras (mirrored or mirrorless) are simply data collection devices, where all collected data end up in the a processing system (LR or any other software) to produce images. So think out what works for you away from the hype created by the manufacturers.
Fair point in that the justification of how good the 5dsr is for great landscape photography. I have a 5ds and wouldn't want to spend £3k on a body. I have other cameras for sport and action, also old DSLR cameras in 1dx and 7dii. I have never spent more than £1k on a camera body and had fantastic rewards. Some may say weight has a bearing on the difference, but the body difference is circa 200g and the RF 14-35 f4 v EF 16-35 f4 is only circa 60g, so little difference.
Big fan Gary, great, interesting video however I feel that there is a little unfair bias. 1st cost: how much was the 5Dsr when it was introduced (pro rata) can't compare a new camera to a second hand one. 2nd You used EF lenses on a mirrorless camera, try RF lenses on the camera its designed for. 3rd There are loads of focal points on the R5 that are useful to avoid focus, recompose. 4th Are you getting mega bytes and megapixels mixed up? you showed 45000kb up to 90odd they aren't MP are they? or am I missing something? Yep you've guessed it I have an R5 and absolutely love it but I don't only shoot Landscapes so the eye detection for wildlife and motorsport is awesome and 20fps even the video So I fully understand where you are coming from, although if I were only shooting landscapers I'd go medium format.
Fair points Gray. I do think the price, old or new should play a major part in the comparison though. When it comes to the lenses I used, my hands were pretty much tied. I did have RF lenses but they won't fit the 5DSr as you know. Furthermore, not everyone who buys the R5 will only use RF lenses. It obviously makes sense to but that's an even larger cost. I'm guessing you love your R5 then 😁😁 Cheers Gray
That was wonderful Gary thanks... so in your opinion how would the five DSR handle a night skyline cityscape such as the Brooklyn Bridge in the foreground of New York skyline... would the blacks be black such as the sky...Thanks I love your videos
Agree with Macro Daz, Sensor size and file size do not correlate. I was intrigued that your High ISO test was at 800 ISO. Sorry but high ISO these days is 25,600+ ISO. I agree with your conclusion the R5 is not a landscape camera.
Agree re my high ISO test but a high ISO test for landscape cameras is roughly 800. Wedding photography is another matter of course but I wanted to put the camera through it's paces as a landscape photographer. Plus, I know the R5 would handle noise so much better than the 5DSr. Cheers Keith 👍👍
@@GaryGough Fully understand.100 ISo is base for landscape. For railway photography (my hobby) 400-800 iso is a base with 1600-3200 iso often needed. 1/1000 sec shutter speed needed and with a train you cannot "wait forthe light". Different horses for different courses.. Cheers Keith
I used 5DSR in the past and bought a R5 this year. Somehow, it feels that 5DSR have much better color than R5, especially golden hour at sunset. Anyone have similar feeling?
Sense and commonsense will always shine through. Your video today shined like the Northern Star! For me, If I had a Canon Mirrored camera with my EF lenses and wanted an upgrade, I would search out a good second-hand 5DSR. That is because I would be shooting landscapes, seascapes, and cityscapes with a bit of street photography. Then if I had the money to splash the cash...I maybe would use the money saved between Second-Hand 5DSR & R5 and buy or upgrade a lens or two. Good lenses are for life...cameras are like cars. Anyways my pennyworth for what it's worth.
Am I missing something? At 18:30 you are comparing R5 and 5dsr images but both are cr3 raw, so both have to be R5 images. Also, as an owner of an R5 and 5dsr - both are great - but the R5 has way more dynamic range. Not even close.
I definitely compare them both Tom. I will happily argue your point about "not even close" though. I've been using the R5 for some time now and the difference is barely noticeable. It's a little better but it's certainly not worth the upgrade AS A LANDSCAPE PHOTOGRAPHER that is :)
Great comparison Gary. I would love to get my hands on the R5 - I shoot landscape and wildlife. But can't justify that price tag at the moment. Nice to see you sticking with Canon. Always enjoy your videos.
Appreciate your time and effort in this video Gary. I suppose the key element to landscape photography rather than the camera bodies themselfs is the lenses used. Far better to get a second hand canon 5dsr with a top quality lens, than get the canon R5 with a cheaper lens, assuming the money people have to spend is limited. There will always be this feeling that newer is always better, but perhaps when it comes to landscape photography that probably isn’t so. The majority of cameras from the last few years are fantastic, which means there are some second hand bargains, especially where bodies are concerned and this video of yours proves that.
I got the 5ds in January of 2024 because I already had a huge selection of EF L series lenses and an R6. For just the 50 megapixels it made sense to get a 5ds instead of an R5.
I have a 5D mk4 and the 7Dmk2, I have been looking at the 5Dsr to add to my stable but I'm not in a hurry now after seeing your comparisons between the 5d mk 3 last week but this comparison I will take on board as I progress. I've always been happy using a DSLR and chop and change between thinking should I one day get a mirrorless as I progress, I'm thinking after listening to your commonsense approach, it will be the 5dsr for me later. I really have to watch pennies. Upgrading for me is a part of my learning process, I learnt a lot upgrading from my 20D to the 7Dmk2 then the 5Dmk4. The upgrade to digital from my AE-1 was as you say a bigger move. I can take lots of pics without getting in trouble, film processing costs. And I have had Readly for a while now and love it.
Hi Gary I'm not a Canon shooter - maybe I should be - the 5DSR looks like a bargain. But I enjoy your videos so watched it anyway. I was a little confused over equating file size to megapixels - I think the correlation is very loose and probably depends on complexity and colour depth of the image as well as compression. Full size uncompressed fuji X raw files are ~55mb yet the images are only 24-26mpx. The raw file doesn't contain the image per se - just the info needed to make it, a bit like the ingredients for a cake (raw) rather than the finished article (jpeg). The recipe comes from the software post-processing. Taking the analogy further - if you have all the ingredients to make a 8" chocolate cake , they might fit into a box of a certain size. Lets say you wanted to add jam and sprinkles - the cake is the same size but more complex....but the box of ingredients is larger. PS - Mormon church - awesome. I've been meaning to shoot that for ages!
Hello Gary, Seeing as you currently have the Canon R5 Mirrorless with you, how's about showing us in very simple terms how to use Focus Peaking and how to get the affinity marker in the required place, please ???
Great review but I think you've confused file size with sensor megapixels. The RAW file size is a function of the CR3 codec used by canon and the image complexity. I think the IBIS in the R5 certainly gives more scope for hand-held landscape photography and the EVF is also great in low light. It's great to be able to see your image even with a 10 or 15 stop ND filter on. Like you I've used a 5DIII for over 12 years, but as I've got older I find I really wanted to carry less weighty kit around. The R5 price is a tad pricey for me, but last year I picked up an EOS R at bargain price and the image quality is much better than my 5DIII. Love the flippy-our screen (less old age bending required) but the mode dial on top is a huge step backwards, as is the on-off dial (which I refuse to call a switch because it isn't) which is so difficult to use in sub-zero temperatures.
Your findings make perfect sense. If you still are creating knockout shots with what you have and you do not at the moment need any of the extra bells and things, it only makes sense to keep what you have, and only upgrade when you need to.
While I have no experience specifically with the R5 / 5DSR, I went through the DSLR to mirrorless transition from the 20D to the M50 mark II, and then have returned to 5D and 5D mark iii. I love the flip out screen and the good quality video capability - even though it's a modest M50, but with EF lenses it records superb 1080p footage. (Notes for the 4K world: the 1080p is enough for me. 1080p screens are not all equal, a good 1080p screen with a good 1080p footage is a better viewing experience than a mediocre 4K with a fragile 4K recording. People always say that my 4K is amazing, how do they make their 4K as good... And then I have to correct them they are seeing 1080p....) That being said, I had several lessons learned with the mirrorless transition, the most important was that I have returned to DSLR. Got a 5D classic, and now a 5D mark III. In image quality rendering I find them a lot more to my taste than the mirrorless. While the M50 is the little brother to the R series, they both share the same kind of look for their output. The sensor is not the biggest change with the new models (as you showed it, the sensor development only shows in ability to push extremes more), the biggest change is in the processing of the images. It is not that noticeable on landscapes, but very prominent on skin tones and portraits, and the M/R series have the same "modern look" for their output files, compared to the DSLR look - how the colors and textures are pre-processed. (RAWs are already pre-processed by the built in signal processing at the sensor level.) 1. Initially I had a love hate relationship with the mirrorless images. Man made objects looks amazing on the better native M lenses, higher resolution than on the EF lenses on DSLR. However, skin tones, animals, texture of plants looks very poor in comparison. Out of camera very weak, needs serious time in DPP4 to make it look acceptable, and even that falls short from DSLR/EF lenses. 2. In camera corrections turned out to be the key culprit to bad mirrorless textures for organic subjects, turning them off improved skin texture A LOT. 3. Going for EF lenses immensely improved textures, and after serious effort with DPP4 I can make every photo equivalent or nearly equivalent to DSLR output for people / animals / plants. In comparison, with DSLR I work on fine tuning the output, while with mirrorless I work on making it from unacceptable to acceptable. Zoomed out the mirrorless shots are wonderful, but at the pixel level they fall apart lot faster than the DSLR (5D/5Diii and yes, even the 10D! vs the M50). 4. Even on the venerable 10D I can push the sliders to an astonishing level in RAW and still get a great image without degradation. Yes, R5 can do that even further, but the 10D already has more reserves than I need, so it's an unneeded feature. (By me, others workflows and ability to gauge the shot settings might be different). Thank you for the great video, cheers! Janos
Garry I think you are spot on with your final conclusion about the R5, you don’t NEED to spend this amount of money just to take landscape photographs. But I find it an absolute joy to use every time I get it out the bag and the amount of features packed into it make it fun to play around with in other areas of photography. Oh and Just another little thing the R5 would probably eek out a bit more image quality with a native lense fitted, not sure you used one did you?
This was as very helpful video Gary. I'm so glad I came upon your channel while looking for information on the Canon 5DSr. I'm currently shooting the 6D Mark 1 having previously shot on the first generation 5D. I shoot with the 24-105 F4, 24-70 F2.8 (mostly for portraits) and 80-200 F2.8. I find that most of my full frame photography is focused on landscapes, city scapes, and some interest in night skies (and northern lights). From the research I've done, it seems that buying a refurbished or used 5DSr would be a good option for an added capability of detail and dynamic range. I'd keep my 6D for low light situations (concert etc. where I need that capability). Posting on questions on the common forums, I get a lot of, "if you can afford it, upgrade to the R5". But, I too am not going to be shooting sports, I've not done any significant video (I can use my Fuji XT-3 for that). Now being May, 2022, would you agree that the 5DSr (which i can get for $1,100) make sense? Again, great video and I look forward to checking out more of the videos on this channel.
Nice video Gary. Keep in mind that MegaPixels has nothing to do with the MegaByte size of the image. When you say a 45MegaPixel Camera should make a 45MegaByte image, those numbers are not directly relatable. In general a larger MegaPixel camera will have higher MegaByte image, but they aren't directly relatable. The image formats capture more than pixels, they capture color via different bit depths (Number of colors they capture), then the files are compressed by different formats, and other overhead data. MegaPixel is the number of pixels the sensor has, the R5 sensor is a 8192 x 5464 sensor. If you multiply those numbers together you get 44,761,088 pixels, or 44,761 Kilo-Pixels, or 45 Mega-Pixles (Rounded up).
I have the 5D mk4, but I am coinciding moving to the 5Ds R for my Landscape work which is improving all the time. I should have added sharpness with the 5dsR, not sure how they stack up and how much I will benefit from the change
They're pretty close to be honest. I use them both. Having said that, I always choose the 5DSr first. The file sizes are much larger. The problem is, cameras have come on leaps and bounds of late. Whilst this is great, the sensor technology can only improve slightly each time.
Agree ----- there are so many variables in capturing a quality landscape image that if your camera is good enough, then get out and use it and dont worry about new 'better' kit.
Thank you for providing the R5 and 5DsR RAW files. There's no doubt the R5 sensor is better and Canon has come a long way on this. One thing I also noticed is at the far end of the pier the R5 has better clarity and depth on it where on the 5DsR it is all fuzzy. I am definitely upgrading to R5 but waiting for the right moment and the right time to do so. Watching that R3 in development, the only problem is I also shoot wildlife so speed and accuracy is important for me.
Gary, I also have the 5DSR and was wanting your opinion on using ISO (L)50 as compared to ISO 100. I see you use the expanded ISO often and curious to know the benefits if any of using it. Thank you again for your time.
Hi James, I use ISO 50 all the time. I mainly use it to reduce light so I can extend my shutter speeds. There is no quality loss at all. Hope that helps 👍
I am not sure if I am right: Did you use the same lens on both bodys (with adapter on the R5)? If so, I am not at all surprised that the differences in the images are so minimal (though of course the shooting experiance will differ slightly - optical/digital viewfinder, focus peaking, ...). I shoot MFT (Lumix) and Nikon (previously DSLR, now Z), so I don't know much about the Canon lenses. But when I started with the Nikon Z system using my "old" F-Mount glass with the ftz-adapter the results were similar to what you found out - there is not much of a difference in the end product. Up to this point I do agree completely with you but that is only half of the story. Anyway though, I think you should compare systems rather than bodys of different systems. It is like (car example) putting a brand new engine into an old chassis and wondering why the driving experiance is almost the same (still pretty good, perhaps more efficient, etc. but not "exciting") ... and that's because you still use the old chassis, breaks, etc. so the car cannot benefit from the new engine as it is limited by old components. If you really want to compare DSLR vs. mirrorless (and if it is worth upgrading) then I don't think it is fair to use adapted lenses on the R5. From a NIKON perspective (don't know if this applies to CANON, too) the real differences come to show when you start using the native "new mount" lenses. That is night and day, a whole new experiance. Especially concening corner-to-corner sharpness, improved micro-contrast and CAs (meaning the absense of CAs). I think this is relevant for landscape shooters, too. So to me it does not make much sense to use a mirrorless body with an adapter and DSLR-lenses. It may help financially during the transition time as you don't have to buy all new lenses at the same time but from an (technical) image quality point of view it just has little to no effect. So changing the body only will not get you many improvements (if any at all) - agreed. My conclusion is: You actually will benefit from going mirrorless as a landscape photographer a) but only, if you transition completely including the lenses and b) just because "the absense of a mirror" gave the engeneers the "room" and opportunity to introduce new mounts to improve the optical designs of the new lenses, benefitting from shorter flange distance, larger mounts, etc. Meaning the "old" mount designs have already been optimised to the limit for quite some time. Improvements come with the new mounts and obviously the manufacturers decided to go mirrorless for the new mounts. The new mounts - and expecially the lenses coming with them - are the major improvement in my opinion. And these are designed around mirrorless bodys. So if you really want to benefit from that you have to go the whole way and get the latest lenses, too. A mirrorless body only won't do it.
I used the same glass on both bodies. It wasn't a mirrored vs mirrorless comparison. It was more about what the results of the images were between both cameras. Cheers Marc 👍👍
@@GaryGough Hi Gary, thanks for the reply. That's what I thought. And in this case using the same lens surely is the way to go. But I think that most of the recent improvements come from the lenses. So maybe a future test for you might be comparing the R5 (or any other mirrorless camera) with a native and an adapted lens. I would suggest that the differences are much more visible than here. Just a thought... keep up the great work, I really enjoy your videos ;-)
Discover unlimited Magazines & Newspapers all in one app
Click the link below and start your free 6-week trial
readly.me/garygough21
tinyurl.com/cndrbz8e
This video is three years old and the 5DSR is still the best camera for the money for landscape photography.
Down to earth conclusion from a down to earth man. That's why your channel is one of the few I still follow.
Keep up the good work and thank you sir!
Awesome, thank you! 👍👍
Every single person looking at upgrading/changing cameras should listen carefully to your summary and apply your thought process. Nailed it when you stressed the type of photography you do and intend to use the new camera for. Horses for courses, it really is as simple as that but often we find it difficult to ignore the noise of sales hype.
One point I'd like to make about when you pushed the files from under North Pier, whilst I accept there is no way under normal shooting situations we would ever push a single fie that far there is a certain degree of reassurance in knowing you CAN, it gives confidence in the kit you are using and this should not be underestimated.
I have recently bought a Nikon D850 to replace the Nikon D750 and the increased dynamic range really blew me away, will I ever use it? highly unlikely as a landscape photographer, was it comforting to know I could? As a hobbyist, yes.
Thank you for another superb real-life test, you really did put so much into this one.
Cheers John. You're right about knowing it's there if you ever need it 👍👍
Apart from the obvious bells and whistles on the R5 and R6, I have found some unexpected benefits of going mirrorless. As an older photographer I found myself struggling with carrying the weight of the 5dmk4 and tripod. The R6 is lighter and IBIS allows me to use lower shutter speeds without always having to lug the tripod. Additionally, setting all the parameters so that I can control them whilst looking through the viewfinder means I don't have to keep taking my glasses on and off - I can control and review images through the view finder. It doesn't sound much but I have found it has really helped me to enjoy my photography again.
Nothing worse than glasses on glasses off every 2 minutes. It drives me crazy :) That's a good enought reason to go mirrorless :)
@@GaryGough I am with you there BUT.... I found out a new pair of glasses that allows me to see far away as well as short distance without having to take them off are about $300. This is far less expensive than a $4000 upgrade just for that feature. But yes, I am taking my glasses off every 2 minutes until my new pair of glasses arrive on the mail and it is extra annoying. :-) By the way, your video is by far the best ever made on that topic and trust me, I have watched them all.
Now it's 2023 and the 5dsr can be had used for $1000 in excellent condition. The R5 is about $3000 new. For 1/3 the cost it's got me thinking about picking up the 5Dsr. What does everyone else think?
Did you purchase a 5DSR or were you just commenting?
@@Stop-All-War Haven't found a 5Dsr so now I am thinking about a used 5D Mark IV. Although I would love to have an R5 or R6 Mark II as an amatuer it is hard to justify.
@@garfgo
I got an R6 mki and honestly, its so overkill. I like the accuracy of the light metering though. I got it for birds andbit does spendidly for that, but its totally silly for lanscape unless you can find a hell of a deal. The ibis is nice too, but a stabilized lens gives way more bang for buck for sure. If I didn't get into birds I wouldn't have gone for this camera at all. Occasionally I use my 2005 5D to remind me that gear doesnt matter. I can barely tell the difference between them on a good photo. At a reasonable enlargement, only 12.7mp.
The 5DS&R are fantastic if you wanna do big prints. More dynamic range at base iso but if you use a tripod.. just bracket for more dynamic range than any camera in one shot. Plus, I find the ultra raised shadows kind of gaudy. A screen or print is 6 stops or less.
I moved up the the Canon 5DSR in 2016 from my older 5DMk2. The 5DSR is a superb camera and I'm completely satisfied with the image quality. I only shoot Landscapes and can compensate for some shortfall in dynamic range by exposure bracketing & using graduated filters.... simple. The arguments around the mirrorless camera world is weight, that is quite ridiculous indeed! Put the Canon f2.8 70 - 200 USM Mk2 on the either body and its going to be heavy, the glass is heavy, high quality. Good glass & 50 million pixels you get a sharp image if you do all the other things needed: stable camera, appropriate shutter speed, focus correctly. The next Canon Camera that has 100meg sensor & medium format sensor, then I'll consider a change....maybe LOL!
A sincere opinion from a sincere man. Words of wisdom from a real, not just a youtuber, pro photographer.
People, please forget the pixel spotting forever. I don't want to recall now the words the great Ansel Adams said.
Please go outside and enjoy photography with whatever camera you can afford!
Thank you very much, Gary. You are an inspiration.
All the best.
Great video Gary. I was able to grab a lightly used 5DSR with only 4,000 shots on it for $1k when people were unloading them last year to fund R5 purchases. I could not be happier and use it extensively for all of my photography videos. The fact that the 5DSR and R5 200% images are identical is remarkable.
I'm very happy the 5DSr too Brian, it really is a belting camera 👍👍
5dsr is stunning camera. I brought a second hand one a couple of years back, unfortunately I made the mistake of selling it and buying a Nikon d850. The d850 is a great camera too but outside of the dynamic range I prefer the Canon system, all the Canon L glass I used was noticeably sharper than the Nikon equivalent especially corner performance.
Good video. I do landscape and bird photography as well as some event photography. I have owned a 5DSr for several years. I also had a 5D MK IV which I traded for an R6. I agree that the 5DSr still does a remarkable job when hi-res is needed. The R6 is good for the other times. Your findings confirmed my experience.
Cheers 👍👍
Great informative video Gary, always look forward to them, also glad that you are a "hard core" Canon Man.
Happy to change if it was viable and worth the hassle :)
Hello Gary. Greetings from WA State, USA! I found your video thru a search on the subject. I am very glad that I found your channel. This high quality professional grade informative video is one of the best ever I’ve seen on TH-cam. You convinced me that my mighty 5DSR is a keep for landscape photography. Thank you very much! Liked and subscribed.
Very kind of you to say, thank you 👍👍
@@GaryGough thank you Gary. Do you discuss post processing techniques on your channel? That’s an interesting topic to me and would love to learn from you.
Loved the video and your way of explanation.
Thanks a lot 😊
First off Mk3 Canadian Landscape photographer that just got a 5Dsr a year back. I waited for years for the prices to come down on the camera that has become my workhorse. I LOVE THE THING! Your video was very timely and it helped me see the value of my present camera. Your video was a good check against the feelings of having to keep up with the joneses. Thanks from sunning Alberta!!
Cheers Drew. Stunning Alberta sounds very nice indeed 😁😁
Loved the comparison and I think you have explained in much depth with very good proof. Also allowing members to download the files and see for themselves is also another bonus.
Once again forever grateful of the knowledge, experience and content you share with us every week.
Richie. X
Cheers Richie 👍👍
@@GaryGough welcome as always Gary.
Richie x
I own a 5DSR, it is the single most incredibly befitting camera for my needs, and while using it for almost everything including landscapes, wildlife, nature, art, macro, sports, portraits and everything else, it is spectacular. The focus system is up for literally anything. i get all shots in focus for whatever i do, my focus rate is almost 100%. i am more than content with the fps. i dont understand who needs any more stops of dynamic range and for what purposes? who would intentionally underexpose that much? yes the high iso performance can sometimes be an issue, but i am ready to work around it and i understand why that would be an issue for some and the weight but they dont bother me. i dont like holding a mirrorless, its utterly unauthentic, and none of the newer models satisfy my needs. i love my 5DSR and my incredible collection of lenses with it. i dont shoot video, so its a perfect camera for me. excellent video, loved the summary hehe, cheers
I'm a Nikon user and have been for 40 plus years. For me to watch a video about Canon gear just proves how good you are Gary.
Consider yourself added to my Christmas card list 👍👍 If I knew you were a Nikon user I would have banned you a long time ago lol 😁😁 Take care xx
I'm in the same boat as you (except Nikon for 61 years).... agree with you 100%. Gary is a class act.
Gary I can't tell you how much this video means to me! I am in this exact moment trying to decide between these 2 cameras. I agree with you 110%! I'm transitioning from a portrait to Landscape/Architectural photography. I'll be retiring in a few years and I am purchasing my last camera. Seeing these photos and comparing them, I have no need to go with the R5. The 5DSr is the camera for me. Thank you very much for this video! Your photography inspires me to push further into my craft and achieve these types of photographs on my own. Bravo Mr. Gough!
Thanks so much, Gary. The methodology makes sense to me too.
Still trying to justify moving from 5D IV to R5 - you bring a bit of sanity to this.
Thanks Gary, a great test and very interesting. I upgraded from a 5DII to the R, and apart from the obvious advantages of mirrorless, I'm not so sure that image quality actually improved. Sure, you get an extra 10Mp, but for landscape photography there is no call for heavy cropping. I didn't do any side-by-side comparisons, but I think, looking at my old landscape images with large texture variation, that the 5DII may have slightly better colour saturation. For action (birds) I still use my trusty old 7DII, and yes, the R5 would be fantastic, but as an armature, it's far too expensive, so am waiting for an R7. Great show.
Another 5D2 fanboy 😁 The 7D is an excellent choice of camera as well. Interesting to hear your positive findings regards the colour pallet of 5D2 👍👍
Interesting analysis Gary. Your honesty and openness in summarising your findings is very refreshing.
Great review, sir! I just purchased the brand new 5DS R.
Hope you enjoy it!
I've been shooting landscapes and stills with the 5DMKII for over 11 years now and am finally considering an upgrade. I was looking closely at the 5DSR for a long time, but my attention was taken away by the mirrorless cameras. This video has been very helpful for me, as I am having trouble justifying the cost of the R5 compared to the older 5DSR.
Think what you can do with £2k I just save you! 😁😁
One of your best videos Gary. I enjoy them all, but this one was worth your work, and redoing that closing as many times as you did was the right choice. Thx for keeping the tone straight - mind vs. heart - true need vs. desire. Well done.
I also primarily focus on landscape and architecture, but play around with or at least have the desire to do more macro, pets, family shots and who knows what since this is only a hobby for me - nothing professional. I too don’t have a need for video today, but having more capabilities is plus in terms of hopefully allowing me to hang on to this body a little longer than I perhaps otherwise would. Be it personal computers or electronic/camera gear, I always try to buy a little more capability than I presently need, so it hopefully lasts me a little longer. I tend to leap frog technology changes vs. doing many perhaps more expensive incremental changes along the way. Besides using my iPhone 12 Pro that is always with me, I wanted to make the jump from my trusty 5DIII mirror to mirrorless one day. I only had those two cameras - one primarily for snaps when I’m out and about, the other when I want to focus on my hobby, bring out the good glass and perhaps the tripod. I’ve been watching and waiting in the wings as the mirrorless tech has been evolving. When the R5 came out, I consciously allowed my heart and desire to override my normal analytical ways, spending the extra cash for an R5 over a lesser mirrorless model that would have fit my needs today just as well. The R5 is much more than I need or presently use today, and like you, I would never recommend it feature/function/price-wise for someone that does only landscape. I’m glad to have made the switch to mirrorless and hopeful my R5 serves me well for years to come, with plenty of capabilities to explore beyond my core love of landscape and architecture.
THX AGAIN for your great channel Gary.
I'm sure you'll be rocking the R5 for years and years to come. It's a beast of a machine. Cheers Bert 👍👍
GREAT RESPECT for the sane and honest review Gary! A real pleasure to watch.
Cheers xx
Great video Gary
I have an R5 but I agree with your conclusions, for LANDSCAPE photography it really is not worth the extra cost. For me, I shoot portraits and landscapes and wanted a camera that could excel in both disciplines....I'm not disappointed at all.
Keep up the great work, always look forward to your videos.
Cheers Lee 👍👍
Great video as always! Just a note on file size - they're varying so much due to what's actually in the frame - the more complex a scene is the higher the file size will be. If you fill the frame with a white sheet of paper followed by filling it with grass on your lawn, the lawn shot will have a considerably bigger file size due to the fact there's more detail in the image and thus more information needs to be stored in the file. File size even changes with ISO - the higher the ISO the larger the file size, this is because the noise itself in high ISO images needs to be stored within the file. You can see the effect of this if you look at the counter telling you how many images you have left on your card, as you increase ISO you'll see that number drop. Love your channel, your enthusiasm has certainly inspired me to keep going out with my camera over the last incredibly difficult 13 months so thank you for your efforts!
Cheers Paul 👍👍
Hi Gary I have had the 5DSR for a few years now .. they are great cameras .. but you need a serious quality lens on the front or it will punish you for sharpness. I use a Zeiss distagon 15mm f2.8 . I had a canon 16/35f2.8 mkii which softened the resolution. So in low light the 5DSR is not the best . But when it all comes together the resolution is brilliant. I love my 5DSR . I don’t think in terms of resolution I don’t think the R5 is 3 times better for the money! Thanks for this comparison which no one to date I have seen do .I also have used my 5DSR for extensive wildlife.. with the canon 300mm f2.8 .. shutter speed must be high up over 1000 and when you get the sweet spot of that lens it’s a deadly combination. The one thing many people don’t realise is the quality of your lens determines the size of the image size . The higher the quality of lens the bigger the resolution files . I have jpg files bigger than 50mb from the 5DSR , these are single shot image files .
In theory, there is nothing you can't shoot with the 5DSr. It's about the whistles and bells that determines who the camera is targeted at. It obviously makes sense to buy a camera with a higher fire rate to shoot sport though. But as you said, it'll still be a great camera for wedding and wildlife etc. Cheers Ross 👍👍
I own 5dsr too and I'm totally agree with you. You need a better glass to experience the difference. I use 24-70 f/4 L lens most of the times. I sold my 24-105 f/4 L lens to switch to 24-70 and noticed the difference. The camera itself is very unforgiving if you are not careful with your shutter speed.
Very detailed comparison 👌. Thanks very much for sharing 😊 I liked and subscribed 👍
Spot on review Gary and beautifully articulated. I have had my 5DSr for a few year and had the chance to test it against the R5 extensively in the Dales a few weeks ago. Exactly the same conclusions for landscapes although I didn’t push the files as far as you did.
Cheers Steve 👍👍
Fabulous information Gary and a big thanks for putting all your time into it 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Cheers Steve 👍👍
Thank you for introducing readly, I never knew what it was. I hope it worked using you link as I had to switch to Germany. I hope this helps to support you a little bit. I really like your channel and hope to see many more videos!
Best regards from Germany! Tanja
Thank you Tanja ❤👍
I have been looking at a 5DSr because my R5 has been programmed to defocus third party lenses. Using my Sigma 120-300 f2.8 I get excellent results with my 5D4, but switching to the R5 only 20% are sharp. The 5D4 is excellent, only sometimes I want the cropping power of the R5. Primarily this is when using Sigma lenses, also 150-600, 150 macro, to ensure sharpness. Of course an alternative would be a Sony with an adapter but I don't want another system.
You won't go far wrong with either a 5D4 or a 5DSr the latter being my favourite. Awesome for cropping power too. Better than the R5 infact.
Thank you for this extensive review. I have a very large number of EF lenses and several cameras that use those lenses natively. While I understand I can purchase an adapter to continue to use those lenses on an R5, I hesitate because of my reluctance to use adapters of any sort. Maybe I am wrong in thinking this. I will soon be picking up two secondhand camera bodies (a 5DS and a 5DSR [they were so cheap it was just a spur of the moment decision to get both]) and this video has certainly cemented, in my mind, that I will not regret the decision to purchase them. (And, here in Australia, the R5 would be around 6 times the cost of both the 'new-to-me' bodies combined).
You won't be dissapointed. 👍👍
Çok faydalı bir video olmuş. Çok teşekkür ederim.
You’re welcome 👍
Nice and clean results! I recently sold my Nikon D750 and all the lenses I had. Upgraded to an Z6 mark II with only two lenses. So in a way I downgraded. Didn't cost me a whole lot, all the stuff fits in a much smaller bag and wheighs a lot less. The Z6 is a joy to use. I am happy. But will it make my pictures any better? No, I don't think so. The quality of my pics are in me and not in my gear....I totally agree with you: which goals do you expect from upgrading and what is that you need.
See you next week!
Cheers Martien, looking forward to it 👍👍
Thats one excellent video Gary - no nonsense, just testing and saying it as it is - well done you. Personally I could never, ever justify that kind of money on a hobby but I still found the vid very interesting. Canon must be just aiming at you pro's with a tag like that, same as all the other brands. Us peasants are well and truly being ignored now.
lol we're all peasants Toby 😁😁 your words not mine btw lol
Yet another great bit of content Gary, Well done mate !!!
Thanks 👍
Hi Gary, interestingly I made these comments on you Mk III vs R6 vid, (hadn't found this one then). In short my 5Ds does what you have shown and described perfectly here. Only additional observation was the apparent noise in the video, then I realised your shirt really is like that ;) Great job again, thank you!
I'm a bit late commenting I know but the 5Ds means I still don't need to change.
Great Video Gary thank you so much. I'm in my early 60s and a very keen hobbyist who changed to the R5 as my first full frame from a 70D, which as you mentioned, was a huge leap forward. But the 5DRS was a camera I was also considering as a close friend of mine has the same camera and his images always looked fantastic when we compared after a Landscape shoot. The flexibility of the R5 for means I can use it for many other things other than Landscape like motor sport although shooting Landscape images is my first love.
That's not a bad intruduction to full-frame cameras :) The R5 is amazing on so many fronts. Great choice Nick 👍👍
@Nick Extremely happy to see your comment since I am also planning to upgrade from my 70D to R5.
There's just one reason I'd consider the R-series and it's the amazing mirrorless focussing ability, on moving subjects.
Having eye-tracking focus is a game changer for portraits and weddings. It means you can concentrate on composition, and interaction with the subject, rather than constantly doing focus/recompose on the eyes.
I can get this with a canon RP though, for about £800 (although the R6mk2 may be the R5 killer for me).
It's 2023 and time for an R5mk2 ..... that may be the camera to rule them all.
Great job Gary. Happy that you explained the camera like a tool. Pick the right one for the job. In your video the best part of those cameras was you.
The LDS Temple is beautiful. Thanks for sharing.
This video has verified my original opinion of both of these cameras. As a real estate/architecture and landscape photographer, there's absolutely no way I could ever justify spending $3,700 for a 45mp body vs spending $1,500 for a 50mp. I already own a Canon EOS R 30mp body with which I'm pleased, and have previously owned a 5DS r (which I regret having sold). I appreciate your well balanced analyses of these cameras and the fact that you've provided a clear understanding of their use in your style of photography. I've just come upon this video and have decided to subscribe to your channel. I look forward to viewing more of your videos. Thank you.
I have a 5ds and was considering changing it to an EOS R, but decided against it. Would you say the R isn't as good as the 5DSR?
@@rickigoode8536 I find the EOS. R to be very capable in terms of photographic quality. It is substantively different from the 5DS and 5DSr in terms of megapixels, however its 30.2 mp sensor is superior in dynamic range. Another benefit of the EOS R vs the 5DS and 5DSr is its articulating touch screen which is a great asset. And if you’re into video, it also shoots 4k, although with a substantial 1.6 crop. The EOS R’s lack of a 2nd card slot doesn’t mean anything to me because of what and how I shoot. That said, it may be a drawback for a run-and-gun photographer who shoots weddings or other live-action events, like sports. Finally, the price is also very accommodating, especially if when buying used, as I did. Hope this info is helpful.
@@kennethjonesphotography Thank you. These have been what I have also established in research, so I don't feel I get any better or worse through changing the 5ds to an R personally. The R also wouldn't be a suitable replacement of my 1dx or 7dii for sports and wildlife action either, as seem to miss shots on lesser FPS. I still need to try one for a few days though. Where do you display your work?
Thanks, a no nonsense well done video. Very professional and informing. I had the same questions but you hit it right on the head and discussed it as a seasoned photographer. So refreshing, well done.
Cheers Bill 👍
I am so glad I found this channel. I love your work and your common down to earth sense.
HI Gary, thanks a lot for the video, the great effort and the availability of the images to test. I made a noise technical analysis using common photography software. It is not how it should be done to be conclusive but the orders of magnitude of the results will be close to the real solution. I took the two images of the under exposed peer from CR2 and CR3 files and increased the shadows +100 in ACR. Then on PS a gauss filter was applied to remove high frequency response (usually associated with noise). Then the filtered image was subtracted from the original one and the results exported as a new document. Finally the mean of the subtraction and the amount of "noisy" pixels were counted. By doing this the results were approximately the following: CR2 file has 12% more noise and 6% more intensity in the noise (possibility to perceive it). This can be done using more specialized tools but also will required more controlled original image parameters. Bottom line: CR2 is noisier, but is the CR3 files almost 4K$ "cleaner"? For web consuming even in 4K displays may be no. For high end printing product/fashion/art/wildlife when for some reason you have this contrast and under exposed situations? May be yes.
Blimey, that's pretty technical stuff :) I just use my eyes 😁😁 Sometimes I'm glad I'm not interested in the techy side 😁😁 Cheers for the explanation xx
@@GaryGough thank you for the great job, inspiration and the opportunity to share with the community.
Thank you for this. Really appreciate quantified results in addition to real world perception comparison.
Strangely, but not sure if its just the white balance, the 5DSR here looked like it had more color information in the rusty iron, the R5 was greener and flatter looking.
Cracking video, thanks! Can't believe I've only just discovered your channel :).
Great video and comparation, thanks for sharing Gary
Cheers xx
As always great video Gary. Do you think the results would differ if you used the RF lenses on the R5 for landscape photography? Maybe a 3rd video???
I used the RF lenses on the R6 comparison video. The difference is marginal. The EF 16-35mm lens is super sharp. The difference between the lenses was minimal. Cheers Mark
I appreciate the time and effort you put into this. I've got an R5 but I saw that the 5DS R was on sale right now for only $1500 US. It sold new for about $4000. At $1500, I thought it would make a great every day camera so that I wasn't wearing out my brand new R5 on unimportant stuff and it will also let me keep running my EF glass a few more years at least. My 1DX is getting long in the tooth and has seen lots of use. It's going to give up the ghost any day now. It seems from this video that $1500 is a steal for the 5DSR considering the image quality it has. Sure, the R5 may outperform it a bit a the extremes, but like you say, I rarely find myself in those situations. If and when I do, I can always bring out the R5. And the bonus is my R5 uses the same exact battery as the 5DS R and I've got 8 of them waiting to be use. Thanks to your video, this choice seems to be a no-brainer.
Glad it was helpful, cheers 👍👍
Thank You ! Thank You ! Thank You ! Gary ...what a brilliant comparison, and thank you Colin for lending Gary the means of doing his usual 'From the heart' blogs. Extremely impressive and professional presentation , packed with great information. I've followed you for a long time, sadly not seen much (my fault) since you left podcasting with 'the boys' ...I'm back in the saddle - Looking forward to catching up ...Keep up the GREAT work
Thank you Gary! I also have a 5diii and was waiting, as you were, for the 5dv that didn't happen. I am really grateful for your video which reiterated my own thoughts and helped me cut through the hype and confusion to make that final upgrading decision. Again thank you.
5DS/R is such a great camera - even after all those years. Hugely underrated when it came out. Best Canon sensor until the release of the 5R. I'm moving to mirrorless myself for the high MPIX action shots, but for landscapes it makes perfect sense to stay with the 5DS/R.
I still have my 5dsr and I couldn't agree with you more!
Interesting points made Gary good to see the differences between them also I have to check mine now cheers Gary 👍
Thanks May 👍👍
Only just found you on here mate and that’s been a big help 👍
thank you for this comparison. I use a number of manual focus lenses. Have you had a chance to use focus peaking? I would like to know if there is a great improvement in using this with mirrorless cameras in terms of accuracy. than you again
Yes I have, I'm not a fan tbh. Cheers Dan 👍👍
@@GaryGough thank you that helps.
Thank you Gary. I think you did a great job at the comparison of these 2 cameras.
Cheers Steve 👍👍
This is going to completely change our R5/5DSr workflow. Thank you so much for putting in all the effort.
I currently have a 5D Mark IV and have been thinking about either the R6 or R5. If the only thing I did was Landscape photography, I would not be considering an upgrade as my 5D4 is fantastic at that. However, I also like to do Bird photography and sports, which is a big reason why I'm considering the upgrade. The R5 and R6 AF system with eye detect is the main reason. The 20FPS is a nice added benefit but not my primary reason.
Have you considered keeping your 5D4 for landscapes? and then buy an R7 for Wildlife & Sports - which is where it shines (plus uncropped 4K). You can use all your EF lenses using the adapter. The money saved would allow investment in a decent sports/wildlife RF lens like the RF 100-500mm.
@@Forthejoyofphotography Not a bad idea. Will have to give that some thought.
Would love to buy the R5 but the R7 is a crop censor. Nothing wrong with crop sensors btw for everything except Wedding Photography. I would have to utilise the camera for Wedding Photography too so it just wouldn't work. Fantastic camera to vlog with though 👍👍
@@GaryGough That is an interesting comment about R7 not working for weddings. Another photographer I follow on TH-cam Ian Worth uses Fuji X-T3s (APC crop sensor) for his wedding photography and portrait photography business. Horses for courses I suppose.
That's a fair recommendation coming from a great Landscape Photographer... thank you..
Very kind of you to say Jack 👍👍
Comments on relationship between MegaPixels and file size for the CanonRaw files has already been made. Absolute uncompressed raw files would be 2 to 3 times the size. As a purely Landscape camera, you are probably right. The R5 offers little more for the money for that genre. However, few of us use our cameras for just one type of photography. As you rightly say, the autofocus in the R5 and also the video features provide an incredibly competent all-round camera. Those features are streets ahead. The RF glass is a step up in quality too.
Agree totally Ian, cheers 👍👍
Such a truthful evaluation. Thank you Gary.. You have most certainly earned the respect and trust of those that use this equipment and have enlightend us as to how we should approach the future... Thank you again....so much. Best wishes 2 U.
Very welcome, cheers Ivan 👍👍
Interesting conclusion now I know your happy with your camera I’ll get the R5. See you soon buddy!
lol Bring it on! 😁😁
Absolutely nailed it Gary. Digital cameras (mirrored or mirrorless) are simply data collection devices, where all collected data end up in the a processing system (LR or any other software) to produce images. So think out what works for you away from the hype created by the manufacturers.
Cheers Khalid 👍👍
Fair point in that the justification of how good the 5dsr is for great landscape photography. I have a 5ds and wouldn't want to spend £3k on a body. I have other cameras for sport and action, also old DSLR cameras in 1dx and 7dii. I have never spent more than £1k on a camera body and had fantastic rewards. Some may say weight has a bearing on the difference, but the body difference is circa 200g and the RF 14-35 f4 v EF 16-35 f4 is only circa 60g, so little difference.
Good morning from New Zealand, Great Canon R5 Vlog, thanks for sharing, have a great day
Cheers Tony xx
Big fan Gary, great, interesting video however I feel that there is a little unfair bias. 1st cost: how much was the 5Dsr when it was introduced (pro rata) can't compare a new camera to a second hand one. 2nd You used EF lenses on a mirrorless camera, try RF lenses on the camera its designed for. 3rd There are loads of focal points on the R5 that are useful to avoid focus, recompose. 4th Are you getting mega bytes and megapixels mixed up? you showed 45000kb up to 90odd they aren't MP are they? or am I missing something? Yep you've guessed it I have an R5 and absolutely love it but I don't only shoot Landscapes so the eye detection for wildlife and motorsport is awesome and 20fps even the video So I fully understand where you are coming from, although if I were only shooting landscapers I'd go medium format.
Fair points Gray. I do think the price, old or new should play a major part in the comparison though. When it comes to the lenses I used, my hands were pretty much tied. I did have RF lenses but they won't fit the 5DSr as you know. Furthermore, not everyone who buys the R5 will only use RF lenses. It obviously makes sense to but that's an even larger cost. I'm guessing you love your R5 then 😁😁 Cheers Gray
That was wonderful Gary thanks... so in your opinion how would the five DSR handle a night skyline cityscape such as the Brooklyn Bridge in the foreground of New York skyline... would the blacks be black such as the sky...Thanks I love your videos
It isn’t the best at very high ISO’s. Noise @ 3200+ is more noticeable than my 5D4 for instance. Not sure that helps but I’m just trying to be honest.
If your happy with the camera your shooting with and it gives you what you want, then that's a happy photographer : )
Agree with Macro Daz, Sensor size and file size do not correlate. I was intrigued that your High ISO test was at 800 ISO. Sorry but high ISO these days is 25,600+ ISO. I agree with your conclusion the R5 is not a landscape camera.
Agree re my high ISO test but a high ISO test for landscape cameras is roughly 800. Wedding photography is another matter of course but I wanted to put the camera through it's paces as a landscape photographer. Plus, I know the R5 would handle noise so much better than the 5DSr. Cheers Keith 👍👍
@@GaryGough Fully understand.100 ISo is base for landscape. For railway photography (my hobby) 400-800 iso is a base with 1600-3200 iso often needed. 1/1000 sec shutter speed needed and with a train you cannot "wait forthe light". Different horses for different courses.. Cheers
Keith
I used 5DSR in the past and bought a R5 this year. Somehow, it feels that 5DSR have much better color than R5, especially golden hour at sunset. Anyone have similar feeling?
Thanks for your honest opinion Gary, appreciate!
Always cheers Neil 👍👍
Sense and commonsense will always shine through. Your video today shined like the Northern Star! For me, If I had a Canon Mirrored camera with my EF lenses and wanted an upgrade, I would search out a good second-hand 5DSR. That is because I would be shooting landscapes, seascapes, and cityscapes with a bit of street photography. Then if I had the money to splash the cash...I maybe would use the money saved between Second-Hand 5DSR & R5 and buy or upgrade a lens or two. Good lenses are for life...cameras are like cars. Anyways my pennyworth for what it's worth.
Cheers Brian 👍👍
Really enjoyed this video Gary and what you have put forward as a comparison makes absolute sense. 📷👍
Cheers Mike 👍👍
Am I missing something? At 18:30 you are comparing R5 and 5dsr images but both are cr3 raw, so both have to be R5 images.
Also, as an owner of an R5 and 5dsr - both are great - but the R5 has way more dynamic range. Not even close.
I definitely compare them both Tom. I will happily argue your point about "not even close" though. I've been using the R5 for some time now and the difference is barely noticeable. It's a little better but it's certainly not worth the upgrade AS A LANDSCAPE PHOTOGRAPHER that is :)
Great comparison Gary. I would love to get my hands on the R5 - I shoot landscape and wildlife. But can't justify that price tag at the moment. Nice to see you sticking with Canon. Always enjoy your videos.
Thanks Susan 👍👍
Appreciate your time and effort in this video Gary. I suppose the key element to landscape photography rather than the camera bodies themselfs is the lenses used. Far better to get a second hand canon 5dsr with a top quality lens, than get the canon R5 with a cheaper lens, assuming the money people have to spend is limited. There will always be this feeling that newer is always better, but perhaps when it comes to landscape photography that probably isn’t so. The majority of cameras from the last few years are fantastic, which means there are some second hand bargains, especially where bodies are concerned and this video of yours proves that.
Cheers Darren 😁😁
As always Gary a very balanced review👍. Thanks for sharing
Thanks 👍
Great channel,author sounds like terrific teacher!
You get inspiration from magazines and we get it from you .excellent work
Gary I respect your final decision. I’ll stay with my mk3 for now but always open to options
It's a busting camera 👍👍
I got the 5ds in January of 2024 because I already had a huge selection of EF L series lenses and an R6. For just the 50 megapixels it made sense to get a 5ds instead of an R5.
I have a 5D mk4 and the 7Dmk2, I have been looking at the 5Dsr to add to my stable but I'm not in a hurry now after seeing your comparisons between the 5d mk 3 last week but this comparison I will take on board as I progress. I've always been happy using a DSLR and chop and change between thinking should I one day get a mirrorless as I progress, I'm thinking after listening to your commonsense approach, it will be the 5dsr for me later. I really have to watch pennies. Upgrading for me is a part of my learning process, I learnt a lot upgrading from my 20D to the 7Dmk2 then the 5Dmk4. The upgrade to digital from my AE-1 was as you say a bigger move. I can take lots of pics without getting in trouble, film processing costs. And I have had Readly for a while now and love it.
Hi Gary I'm not a Canon shooter - maybe I should be - the 5DSR looks like a bargain. But I enjoy your videos so watched it anyway. I was a little confused over equating file size to megapixels - I think the correlation is very loose and probably depends on complexity and colour depth of the image as well as compression. Full size uncompressed fuji X raw files are ~55mb yet the images are only 24-26mpx. The raw file doesn't contain the image per se - just the info needed to make it, a bit like the ingredients for a cake (raw) rather than the finished article (jpeg). The recipe comes from the software post-processing. Taking the analogy further - if you have all the ingredients to make a 8" chocolate cake , they might fit into a box of a certain size. Lets say you wanted to add jam and sprinkles - the cake is the same size but more complex....but the box of ingredients is larger. PS - Mormon church - awesome. I've been meaning to shoot that for ages!
Great analogy Dave. You're right too, cheers 👍👍
Hello Gary, Seeing as you currently have the Canon R5 Mirrorless with you, how's about showing us in very simple terms how to use Focus Peaking and how to get the affinity marker in the required place, please ???
Hi Allan, I only borrowed it for a week. sorry 👍👍
Great review but I think you've confused file size with sensor megapixels. The RAW file size is a function of the CR3 codec used by canon and the image complexity. I think the IBIS in the R5 certainly gives more scope for hand-held landscape photography and the EVF is also great in low light. It's great to be able to see your image even with a 10 or 15 stop ND filter on. Like you I've used a 5DIII for over 12 years, but as I've got older I find I really wanted to carry less weighty kit around. The R5 price is a tad pricey for me, but last year I picked up an EOS R at bargain price and the image quality is much better than my 5DIII. Love the flippy-our screen (less old age bending required) but the mode dial on top is a huge step backwards, as is the on-off dial (which I refuse to call a switch because it isn't) which is so difficult to use in sub-zero temperatures.
Another 5D3 fanboy 👏👏 Agree totally regards the EOS R it's a cracking bit of kit 👍👍
Your findings make perfect sense. If you still are creating knockout shots with what you have and you do not at the moment need any of the extra bells and things, it only makes sense to keep what you have, and only upgrade when you need to.
While I have no experience specifically with the R5 / 5DSR, I went through the DSLR to mirrorless transition from the 20D to the M50 mark II, and then have returned to 5D and 5D mark iii. I love the flip out screen and the good quality video capability - even though it's a modest M50, but with EF lenses it records superb 1080p footage. (Notes for the 4K world: the 1080p is enough for me. 1080p screens are not all equal, a good 1080p screen with a good 1080p footage is a better viewing experience than a mediocre 4K with a fragile 4K recording. People always say that my 4K is amazing, how do they make their 4K as good... And then I have to correct them they are seeing 1080p....) That being said, I had several lessons learned with the mirrorless transition, the most important was that I have returned to DSLR. Got a 5D classic, and now a 5D mark III. In image quality rendering I find them a lot more to my taste than the mirrorless. While the M50 is the little brother to the R series, they both share the same kind of look for their output. The sensor is not the biggest change with the new models (as you showed it, the sensor development only shows in ability to push extremes more), the biggest change is in the processing of the images. It is not that noticeable on landscapes, but very prominent on skin tones and portraits, and the M/R series have the same "modern look" for their output files, compared to the DSLR look - how the colors and textures are pre-processed. (RAWs are already pre-processed by the built in signal processing at the sensor level.)
1. Initially I had a love hate relationship with the mirrorless images. Man made objects looks amazing on the better native M lenses, higher resolution than on the EF lenses on DSLR. However, skin tones, animals, texture of plants looks very poor in comparison. Out of camera very weak, needs serious time in DPP4 to make it look acceptable, and even that falls short from DSLR/EF lenses.
2. In camera corrections turned out to be the key culprit to bad mirrorless textures for organic subjects, turning them off improved skin texture A LOT.
3. Going for EF lenses immensely improved textures, and after serious effort with DPP4 I can make every photo equivalent or nearly equivalent to DSLR output for people / animals / plants. In comparison, with DSLR I work on fine tuning the output, while with mirrorless I work on making it from unacceptable to acceptable. Zoomed out the mirrorless shots are wonderful, but at the pixel level they fall apart lot faster than the DSLR (5D/5Diii and yes, even the 10D! vs the M50).
4. Even on the venerable 10D I can push the sliders to an astonishing level in RAW and still get a great image without degradation. Yes, R5 can do that even further, but the 10D already has more reserves than I need, so it's an unneeded feature. (By me, others workflows and ability to gauge the shot settings might be different).
Thank you for the great video, cheers! Janos
Garry I think you are spot on with your final conclusion about the R5, you don’t NEED to spend this amount of money just to take landscape photographs. But I find it an absolute joy to use every time I get it out the bag and the amount of features packed into it make it fun to play around with in other areas of photography. Oh and Just another little thing the R5 would probably eek out a bit more image quality with a native lense fitted, not sure you used one did you?
Couldn't agree more Gordon. I certainly wasn't trying to put people off buying the R5. I would love one but I can't justify buying it. Cheers 👍👍
This was as very helpful video Gary. I'm so glad I came upon your channel while looking for information on the Canon 5DSr. I'm currently shooting the 6D Mark 1 having previously shot on the first generation 5D. I shoot with the 24-105 F4, 24-70 F2.8 (mostly for portraits) and 80-200 F2.8. I find that most of my full frame photography is focused on landscapes, city scapes, and some interest in night skies (and northern lights). From the research I've done, it seems that buying a refurbished or used 5DSr would be a good option for an added capability of detail and dynamic range. I'd keep my 6D for low light situations (concert etc. where I need that capability). Posting on questions on the common forums, I get a lot of, "if you can afford it, upgrade to the R5". But, I too am not going to be shooting sports, I've not done any significant video (I can use my Fuji XT-3 for that). Now being May, 2022, would you agree that the 5DSr (which i can get for $1,100) make sense?
Again, great video and I look forward to checking out more of the videos on this channel.
Trust me, it’ll be the best $1100 you’ve ever spent on a camera 👍👍
just use your 5dsr at lower resolutions and it will outperform your 6d in low light as well while offering better image quality
Nice video Gary. Keep in mind that MegaPixels has nothing to do with the MegaByte size of the image. When you say a 45MegaPixel Camera should make a 45MegaByte image, those numbers are not directly relatable. In general a larger MegaPixel camera will have higher MegaByte image, but they aren't directly relatable. The image formats capture more than pixels, they capture color via different bit depths (Number of colors they capture), then the files are compressed by different formats, and other overhead data. MegaPixel is the number of pixels the sensor has, the R5 sensor is a 8192 x 5464 sensor. If you multiply those numbers together you get 44,761,088 pixels, or 44,761 Kilo-Pixels, or 45 Mega-Pixles (Rounded up).
I feel better educated now Scott. Great explanation, cheers 👍👍
I have the 5D mk4, but I am coinciding moving to the 5Ds R for my Landscape work which is improving all the time. I should have added sharpness with the 5dsR, not sure how they stack up and how much I will benefit from the change
They're pretty close to be honest. I use them both. Having said that, I always choose the 5DSr first. The file sizes are much larger. The problem is, cameras have come on leaps and bounds of late. Whilst this is great, the sensor technology can only improve slightly each time.
Wonderful video. Nice fair comparison
Cheers 👍👍
Agree ----- there are so many variables in capturing a quality landscape image that if your camera is good enough, then get out and use it and dont worry about new 'better' kit.
Thank you for providing the R5 and 5DsR RAW files.
There's no doubt the R5 sensor is better and Canon has come a long way on this. One thing I also noticed is at the far end of the pier the R5 has better clarity and depth on it where on the 5DsR it is all fuzzy.
I am definitely upgrading to R5 but waiting for the right moment and the right time to do so. Watching that R3 in development, the only problem is I also shoot wildlife so speed and accuracy is important for me.
You'll definitely enjoy the R5 then, it's a cracking camera. Cheers Robin 👍👍
Thats for the great video I own the 5dsr so pleased to hear its still good as I often think of selling it to buy the R5 will stick with the 5dsr :-)
Stick with it Angela 👍👍
It will be a long time before the 5DSr is out gunned.
Gary, I also have the 5DSR and was wanting your opinion on using ISO (L)50 as compared to ISO 100. I see you use the expanded ISO often and curious to know the benefits if any of using it. Thank you again for your time.
Hi James, I use ISO 50 all the time. I mainly use it to reduce light so I can extend my shutter speeds. There is no quality loss at all.
Hope that helps 👍
@@GaryGough Thank you.
I am not sure if I am right: Did you use the same lens on both bodys (with adapter on the R5)? If so, I am not at all surprised that the differences in the images are so minimal (though of course the shooting experiance will differ slightly - optical/digital viewfinder, focus peaking, ...). I shoot MFT (Lumix) and Nikon (previously DSLR, now Z), so I don't know much about the Canon lenses. But when I started with the Nikon Z system using my "old" F-Mount glass with the ftz-adapter the results were similar to what you found out - there is not much of a difference in the end product. Up to this point I do agree completely with you but that is only half of the story.
Anyway though, I think you should compare systems rather than bodys of different systems. It is like (car example) putting a brand new engine into an old chassis and wondering why the driving experiance is almost the same (still pretty good, perhaps more efficient, etc. but not "exciting") ... and that's because you still use the old chassis, breaks, etc. so the car cannot benefit from the new engine as it is limited by old components.
If you really want to compare DSLR vs. mirrorless (and if it is worth upgrading) then I don't think it is fair to use adapted lenses on the R5. From a NIKON perspective (don't know if this applies to CANON, too) the real differences come to show when you start using the native "new mount" lenses. That is night and day, a whole new experiance. Especially concening corner-to-corner sharpness, improved micro-contrast and CAs (meaning the absense of CAs). I think this is relevant for landscape shooters, too. So to me it does not make much sense to use a mirrorless body with an adapter and DSLR-lenses. It may help financially during the transition time as you don't have to buy all new lenses at the same time but from an (technical) image quality point of view it just has little to no effect. So changing the body only will not get you many improvements (if any at all) - agreed.
My conclusion is: You actually will benefit from going mirrorless as a landscape photographer
a) but only, if you transition completely including the lenses and
b) just because "the absense of a mirror" gave the engeneers the "room" and opportunity to introduce new mounts to improve the optical designs of the new lenses, benefitting from shorter flange distance, larger mounts, etc. Meaning the "old" mount designs have already been optimised to the limit for quite some time. Improvements come with the new mounts and obviously the manufacturers decided to go mirrorless for the new mounts.
The new mounts - and expecially the lenses coming with them - are the major improvement in my opinion. And these are designed around mirrorless bodys. So if you really want to benefit from that you have to go the whole way and get the latest lenses, too. A mirrorless body only won't do it.
I used the same glass on both bodies. It wasn't a mirrored vs mirrorless comparison. It was more about what the results of the images were between both cameras. Cheers Marc 👍👍
@@GaryGough Hi Gary, thanks for the reply. That's what I thought. And in this case using the same lens surely is the way to go. But I think that most of the recent improvements come from the lenses. So maybe a future test for you might be comparing the R5 (or any other mirrorless camera) with a native and an adapted lens. I would suggest that the differences are much more visible than here. Just a thought...
keep up the great work, I really enjoy your videos
;-)