Canon 5DS

[Trevspics]

Has anyone got their hands on the new 5DS models yet? If so please let us now how good it is. Thanks.

[Babu]

I'm enjoying my 5DsR so far though I have a lot to learn in order to do justice to it. The extra resolution is amazing but sharp results require better shooting techniques - tripods are handy.

[bitsnpieces]

Sharp results also require certain lenses - I don't know too much but search around, Canon has a list of lenses that it recommends to use and not use for best results.

[bitsnpieces]

Here's a small preview of the camera regarding the lenses
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwLZRKfFmUY

[Trevspics]

Thanks for the replies, a lot to think about and more research to be done, I did not realise there were issues with lens choice. Anymore feed back much appreciated.

[bitsnpieces]

Only one issue that I have with the video above is that on the expensive f2.8 lens compared to the f4 version, he used them at their maximum aperture. As we know, f2.8 can be a little soft sometimes (unless it was a fact that f2.8 on that lens is meant to be sharp). I wonder if the results would have been the same if he put the aperture at f4 instead.

[Dug]

Only one issue that I have with the video above is that on the expensive f2.8 lens compared to the f4 version, he used them at their maximum aperture. As we know, f2.8 can be a little soft sometimes (unless it was a fact that f2.8 on that lens is meant to be sharp). I wonder if the results would have been the same if he put the aperture at f4 instead.

Reminds me of the same thing coming up in something I read recently in a review from LensRental regarding lens copy quality consistency in Ultra wides.

Quote:
"The newer 16-35 f/4 IS L lens is clearly better than the f/2.8 (although remember it's being tested at f/4). It is, like the f/2.8 lens, at it's best at the wide end, but it holds up very well at 24mm and 35mm. Overall the 16-35mm f/4 IS gives very impressive performance. But I know what you're thinking. Would the 16-35 f/2.8 lens be just as good if we were testing it at f/4? Well, I'll show you.

Stopped down to f/4, the 16-35 f/2.8 L dramatically improves in the center at both ends of the zoom range. It's now about as good as the 16-35 f/4 IS at both 16mm and 35mm, although it is a bit different. At 24mm, though, it's still not nearly as good as the IS lens. "

So it depends on the focal length is the short answer.

[bitsnpieces]

Well, that solves that mystery, would this also apply to many of other Canon lenses (which they don't recommend) for the 5Ds?
Well, hopefully some more in-depth reviews come out soon

[Bennymiata]

More megapixels = better resolution REGARDLESS of the lens.
Lenses aren't digital but analogue, so the more resolution you have on the sensor, the better the resolution of the final photo.

However, more megapixels will show up any OOF areas of the lens.