Struggling with 5Dsr on safari

I came back from my twelfth Tanzanian safari (I have safari business interests out there) having shot with a Canon 5Dsr + EF 100-400 Mk2 and was disappointed with the results. In the past I have used a 7D, 5D and 5D3 and in comparison the raw files on average were just not up to the quality of these other bodies. Auto focus was fine and shutter speed was generally more than sufficient to offset the increased resolution over the other bodies but white balance and exposure were all over the place and required much tweaking in post. It was very dry and the light was extremely harsh more so than normal particularly after 8:30 in the morning. I used auto white balance hoping that the camera's best guess would be reasonably correct and centre weighed exposure for most of the shots. As I am extremely pleased with my EF 100-400 Mk2 I tend to shoot Tv to keep the shutter speed up and leave exposure and ISO to auto since there is not a lot to be gained with this lens by stopping down. In the past these settings have served me well. Back home the camera works fine so its not a camera fault as such. I am committed to take some friends out there in the new year and am wondering whether to take the 5Dsr or investigate some other option. Any opinions from experience with a 5Dsr would be much appreciated.

Can you post examples of shots your not happy with?

This is why I always shoot in daylight white balance and in manual exposure mode. I leave nothing up to the camera because you never know what the algorithms inside the camera are going to react to.

I totally agree with E.J. regarding auto WB I always use Daylight - only exception is indoors under unusual artificial light.

I always shoot with a kelvin temp set for the conditions and manual exposure to get a set of consistent images.

I am the same as EJ, Manual mode and sunny WB, Soot RAW and tweek in processing, I dont know if you used a tripod or beanbag but some form of support normally helps

Dave

The 5dsr should be giving you RAW files that compare to those from the 7d2, noise wise and also dynamic range is not far different. I do tend to now shoot in Manual mode with auto ISO, RAW and I tend to leave WB as above. This works well on most new Canons. As you do not show us a specific image with your problems it is hard to say more.

Thanks for your replies. I am not sure that viewing the raw files will be of much use as it is my understanding that the basic raw file is OK. What I understand now is that the camera wrote incorrect parameters to the metadata. As you all know many converters use the metadata as a guide to opening the raw file and as a result the initial image is way off from what it should be and requires much work in post. EJ is correct in that I relied too heavily on the algorithms getting it right and they failed in the difficult lighting conditions. I think what you are all advising and what I have just read on one of Canon's CPS pages is that I should not allow the camera to auto anything save possibly ISO and certainly not WB if I am to get the best from it.

But if you have the RAW files you can edit the files to your liking. The camera embeds a JPG into the RAW for preview purposes which is often used by converters to show a quick loading preview. The JPG uses the profile set by the user in camera (Standard, neutral, landscape...etc) and has no influence on the RAW file, except in DPP which will add that profile to the RAW, but as RAW files cannot themselves be changed or re-written the image can always be edited to your liking in a non-destructive way, whatever auto settings you had the only one which will be noticeable and unchangable is the ISO (and badly exposed images, but this is not always camera at fault).

The only time you need to get WB, saturation etc right in camera is if you are shooting JPG images, which at 8-bit cannot be realistically edited.

Neilyb wrote:But if you have the RAW files you can edit the files to your liking. The camera embeds a JPG into the RAW for preview purposes which is often used by converters to show a quick loading preview. The JPG uses the profile set by the user in camera (Standard, neutral, landscape...etc) and has no influence on the RAW file, except in DPP which will add that profile to the RAW, but as RAW files cannot themselves be changed or re-written the image can always be edited to your liking in a non-destructive way, whatever auto settings you had the only one which will be noticeable and unchangable is the ISO (and badly exposed images, but this is not always camera at fault).

The only time you need to get WB, saturation etc right in camera is if you are shooting JPG images, which at 8-bit cannot be realistically edited.

Actually your JPEG settings do indirectly influence your RAW file because what is displayed on the back of the camera, both in the photo preview and the histogram, blinkies, etc is derived from an embedded JPG inside the RAW file which has whatever JPEG settings are in the camera applied to it.  This can influence you to make incorrect decisions.  For example, lets say you have your picture profile set to vivid - it will show you a very contrasty and colorful preview on the back and also induce blinkies a full stop before the RAW file is actually clipped resulting in you exposing a stop less and giving up dynamic range to avoid those blinkies.  The last thing you want to do on a 5DSR is to give up dynamic range unnecessarily as that camera is already the worst full frame camera on the market for that.  For this reason, on a Canon camera which does not offer a flat profile, setting the profile to neutral and then turning the contrast down to the minimum setting is crucial to get the most dynamic range out of the camera.  Sure that will result in a bland looking image on the back of the camera but that's exactly what you want if you are a RAW shooter.

E.J. Peiker wrote:

Neilyb wrote:But if you have the RAW files you can edit the files to your liking. The camera embeds a JPG into the RAW for preview purposes which is often used by converters to show a quick loading preview. The JPG uses the profile set by the user in camera (Standard, neutral, landscape...etc) and has no influence on the RAW file, except in DPP which will add that profile to the RAW, but as RAW files cannot themselves be changed or re-written the image can always be edited to your liking in a non-destructive way, whatever auto settings you had the only one which will be noticeable and unchangable is the ISO (and badly exposed images, but this is not always camera at fault).

The only time you need to get WB, saturation etc right in camera is if you are shooting JPG images, which at 8-bit cannot be realistically edited.

Actually your JPEG settings do indirectly influence your RAW file because what is displayed on the back of the camera, both in the photo preview and the histogram, blinkies, etc is derived from an embedded JPG inside the RAW file which has whatever JPEG settings are in the camera applied to it.  This can influence you to make incorrect decisions.  For example, lets say you have your picture profile set to vivid - it will show you a very contrasty and colorful preview on the back and also induce blinkies a full stop before the RAW file is actually clipped resulting in you exposing a stop less and giving up dynamic range to avoid those blinkies.  The last thing you want to do on a 5DSR is to give up dynamic range unnecessarily as that camera is already the worst full frame camera on the market for that.  For this reason, on a Canon camera which does not offer a flat profile, setting the profile to neutral and then turning the contrast down to the minimum setting is crucial to get the most dynamic range out of the camera.  Sure that will result in a bland looking image on the back of the camera but that's exactly what you want if you are a RAW shooter.

I understand that E.J but the OP stated his white balance was at fault which is one of those freebies that shooting RAW gives you. The OP of course does not give us enough information to make any assumptions on JPG's or other problems he may be facing. More information about the wrong "metadata" would help greatly in understanding this in the future. 

Even WB is indirectly not really a freebie because it also can make you make incorrect decisions. Let's say you are set to shady white balance but shooting under normal sun or even indoor incandescent lighting. Under those circumstances, your red channel will be shown to be completely blown in the RGB histogram even though in the RAW file it isn't. As in my previous example, that could result in the photographer reducing exposure when he/she does not need to and again giving up precious dynamic range. Of course if the photographer understands that behavior, he/she can just accept some red channel overexposure and be OK, but the vast number of photographers do not understand all of this so I just thought I'd try to clarify.

E.J. Peiker wrote:Even WB is indirectly not really a freebie because it also can make you make incorrect decisions.  Let's say you are set to shady white balance but shooting under normal sun or even indoor incandescent lighting.  Under those circumstances, your red channel will be shown to be completely blown in the RGB histogram even though in the RAW file it isn't.  As in my previous example, that could result in the photographer reducing exposure when he/she does not need to and again giving up precious dynamic range.  Of course if the photographer understands that behavior, he/she can just accept some red channel overexposure and be OK, but the vast number of photographers do not understand all of this so I just thought I'd try to clarify.

NP E.J always good to clarify