Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 103 posts | 
by Scott Fairbairn on Tue Aug 11, 2020 11:50 am
User avatar
Scott Fairbairn
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5131
Joined: 13 Jan 2005
Member #:00437
Adapted glass example in this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okeedXc ... ploademail
 

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Aug 11, 2020 12:25 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Interesting tear down with an eye towards identifying the source of overheating - looks like some better manufacturing could mitigate at least some of the problems:
https://www.eoshd.com/news/chinese-user ... ime-limit/
 

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Aug 11, 2020 12:30 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Studying the dynamic range for the R5 camera, it is quite good but basically ISO 200, 250 and 320 are useless.  It is absolutely pointless to use those ISOs because they are worse than ISO 400 (it would indicate that they are also worse for noise) due to the dual gain design of the sensor.  If you need a higher ISO than 160, your next step should be 400, after that it decays as expected as you go higher:
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/ ... 20EOS%20R5
 

by Dan Wolin on Tue Aug 11, 2020 2:13 pm
Dan Wolin
Forum Contributor
Posts: 4631
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Location: Marshall, MI
Jan Wegener wrote:I managed to put together a video with my first impressions of the camera. For stills, it's simply amazing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vyq304j4wE
The high ISO performance at 45 mpix is basically unheard of. In the video, you can see sample shots at 12800 ISO, which have less noise than my Mark IV at 3200.
Animal-eye Af is the real game-changer for me, it works well and opens up so many more possibilities. And for BIF it's simply next level, my keeper rate has gone through the roof.
In the video, there are a few examples, where the bird flies behind branches and grass and in front of busy backgrounds and the camera doesn't lose focus at all. It never fully loses the birds, not every shot is sharp on the head, but it basically never jumps onto the background and fully loses focus. So far, I am amazed by this camera and it will allow me to take better & more images.
Does it overheat? Yes! And it's kinda bad. The worst issue I had was when the camera was simply idling with the screens running. Within one hour all video recording was essentially gone. So that's disappointing, as I can see this being an issue in the field for sure. Taking a lot of photos takes less toll on the video time than just letting the camera sit somewhere. I will have to remember to turn it off at all times. So it's quite likely that after a few hours of taking images most video functions will be unavailable.
For me personally, the camera makes up for it with its insane stills capabilities, but it was heavily marketed as hybrid and while the video quality and features are great, it's very limited due to overheating.
Hi Jan

Do you happen to have (or have tried) one of the new lenses- I was curious about the 100-500. If not no worries. Thanks for your reviews so far:)
Dan Wolin
Marshall, MI
 

by Mark Boranyak on Tue Aug 11, 2020 4:39 pm
Mark Boranyak
Forum Contributor
Posts: 1354
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: Topeka, Kansas
Dan Wolin wrote:
Jan Wegener wrote:I managed to put together a video with my first impressions of the camera. For stills, it's simply amazing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vyq304j4wE
The high ISO performance at 45 mpix is basically unheard of. In the video, you can see sample shots at 12800 ISO, which have less noise than my Mark IV at 3200.
Animal-eye Af is the real game-changer for me, it works well and opens up so many more possibilities. And for BIF it's simply next level, my keeper rate has gone through the roof.
In the video, there are a few examples, where the bird flies behind branches and grass and in front of busy backgrounds and the camera doesn't lose focus at all. It never fully loses the birds, not every shot is sharp on the head, but it basically never jumps onto the background and fully loses focus. So far, I am amazed by this camera and it will allow me to take better & more images.
Does it overheat? Yes! And it's kinda bad. The worst issue I had was when the camera was simply idling with the screens running. Within one hour all video recording was essentially gone. So that's disappointing, as I can see this being an issue in the field for sure. Taking a lot of photos takes less toll on the video time than just letting the camera sit somewhere. I will have to remember to turn it off at all times. So it's quite likely that after a few hours of taking images most video functions will be unavailable.
For me personally, the camera makes up for it with its insane stills capabilities, but it was heavily marketed as hybrid and while the video quality and features are great, it's very limited due to overheating.
Hi Jan

Do you happen to have (or have tried) one of the new lenses- I was curious about the 100-500. If not no worries. Thanks for your reviews so far:)
Thanks, Jan, for the first impressions review aimed at still photographers. It's the best I've seen so far from someone who has actually used it in the field.
 

by absu on Wed Aug 12, 2020 3:51 am
User avatar
absu
Forum Contributor
Posts: 310
Joined: 17 Jul 2012
Location: West Bengal, India
E.J. Peiker wrote:Studying the dynamic range for the R5 camera, it is quite good but basically ISO 200, 250 and 320 are useless.  It is absolutely pointless to use those ISOs because they are worse than ISO 400 (it would indicate that they are also worse for noise) due to the dual gain design of the sensor.  If you need a higher ISO than 160, your next step should be 400, after that it decays as expected as you go higher:
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/ ... 20EOS%20R5
It is appeared that the sensor is better than D850 which is still one of the benchmark sensor. It is matching with Sony 7R mark IV , that is impressive achievement. 
Is it BSI sensor, probably. Whatever , it is the best sensor canon delivered till days as per data given in the table.
Anirban Basu

"Beauty is simply reality seen with the eyes of love" 
— Rabindranath Tagore

Email: anirbanbasu0606@gmail.com
 

by absu on Wed Aug 12, 2020 4:00 am
User avatar
absu
Forum Contributor
Posts: 310
Joined: 17 Jul 2012
Location: West Bengal, India
Dual gain for Nikon D850, D750 and also Sony 7R mark IV & A9 is kicking in at ISO 800 for R5 it is in ISO 400. So no of unusable ISO in Nikon & Sony is more than Canon IMHO. It is also may be noted it is the first time I have seen dynamic range of Canon camera is higher than Sony & Nikon at Base ISO. It is remarkable achievement & good news for Canon landscape photographer .
Anirban Basu

"Beauty is simply reality seen with the eyes of love" 
— Rabindranath Tagore

Email: anirbanbasu0606@gmail.com
 

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Aug 12, 2020 6:55 am
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
absu wrote:Dual gain for Nikon D850, D750 and also Sony 7R mark IV & A9 is kicking in at ISO 800 for R5 it is in ISO 400. So no of unusable ISO in Nikon & Sony is more   than Canon IMHO. It is also may be noted it is the first time I have seen dynamic range of Canon camera is higher than Sony & Nikon at Base ISO. It is remarkable achievement & good news for Canon  landscape photographer .
You have to be careful with that.  The D850's base ISO is 64 not 100 so you have to shift the graph 2/3 of a stop to make an actual DR comparison and when you do that it is virtually identical.  Also it seems that the R5's dual gain has a much stronger secondary gain stage that kicks in at 400.  The a7R3 kicks in at 640 and the a7R4 at 500. Here's a comparison of the D850, a7R4 and R5.  I've also added the best camera there is, the Phase IQ150 for reference.  Of course it costs more than 10 times as much:  

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R5,Nikon%20D850,Phase%20One%20IQ4%20150MP,Sony%20ILCE-7RM4

The differences between the three (not including the Phase One) are essentially negligible which means that Canon has finally caught up in DR on the R5 after trailing significantly since 2008 but it must be noted that Sony does it with significantly higher resolution so their sensor design is still about a generation ahead as the Canon more or less matches the older a7R3 in resolution:

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/ ... 0ILCE-7RM3

Note:  For those wondering why the numbers depicted in the graphs are about two stops lower than what is claimed by the manufacturers, it is because this is photographic dynamic range not theoretical dynamic range.  Photographic dynamic range is defined as the point where the signal to noise ratio is 20:1 which is about the minimum useable before noise overpowers detail.  Manufacturers use theoretical dynamic range which is a where the signal to noise ratio becomes 1:1 - of course if the signal and the noise are the same, you can not discern the signal from the noise.  For this reason, the photographic dynamic range is a much more useful measure to photographers.

Note 2:  Some may ask how does a 150 megapixel back with a similar pixel size to the 61mp a7R4 have so much more dynamic range?  This is primarily due to two things: 1. 16 bit readout rather than 14 bit readout; 2. active cooling of the sensor and CPU rather than passive cooling.
 

by absu on Wed Aug 12, 2020 7:16 am
User avatar
absu
Forum Contributor
Posts: 310
Joined: 17 Jul 2012
Location: West Bengal, India
E.J. Peiker wrote:
absu wrote:Dual gain for Nikon D850, D750 and also Sony 7R mark IV & A9 is kicking in at ISO 800 for R5 it is in ISO 400. So no of unusable ISO in Nikon & Sony is more   than Canon IMHO. It is also may be noted it is the first time I have seen dynamic range of Canon camera is higher than Sony & Nikon at Base ISO. It is remarkable achievement & good news for Canon  landscape photographer .
You have to be careful with that.  The D850's base ISO is 64 not 100 so you have to shift the graph 2/3 of a stop to make an actual DR comparison and when you do that it is virtually identical.  Also it seems that the R5's dual gain has a much stronger secondary gain stage that kicks in at 400.  The a7R3 kicks in at 640 and the a7R4 at 500. Here's a comparison of the D850, a7R4 and R5.  I've also added the best camera there is, the Phase IQ150 for reference.  Of course it costs more than 10 times as much:  

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R5,Nikon%20D850,Phase%20One%20IQ4%20150MP,Sony%20ILCE-7RM4

The differences between the three (not including the Phase One) are essentially negligible which means that Canon has finally caught up in DR on the R5 after trailing significantly since 2008 but it must be noted that Sony does it with significantly higher resolution so their sensor design is still about a generation ahead as the Canon more or less matches the older a7R3 in resolution:

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/ ... 0ILCE-7RM3

Note:  For those wondering why the numbers depicted in the graphs are about two stops lower than what is claimed by the manufacturers, it is because this is photographic dynamic range not theoretical dynamic range.  Photographic dynamic range is defined as the point where the signal to noise ratio is 20:1 which is about the minimum useable before noise overpowers detail.  Manufacturers use theoretical dynamic range which is a where the signal to noise ratio becomes 1:1 - of course if the signal and the noise are the same, you can not discern the signal from the noise.  For this reason, the photographic dynamic range is a much more useful measure to photographers.

Note 2:  Some may ask how does a 150 megapixel back with a similar pixel size to the 61mp a7R4 have so much more dynamic range?  This is primarily due to two things: 1. 16 bit readout rather than 14 bit readout; 2. active cooling of the sensor and CPU rather than passive cooling.
Yes, you are right EJ. I overlooked the 2/3 correction as base ISO for both camera is not same. But in essential via R5 Canon improved the DR performance in lower ISO significantly which is handy for landscape photographers as you have mentioned. Sony is still ahead in this game. 
Anirban Basu

"Beauty is simply reality seen with the eyes of love" 
— Rabindranath Tagore

Email: anirbanbasu0606@gmail.com
 

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Aug 12, 2020 12:19 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Incredibly impressive eye and face tracking with adapted lenses on R5/R6:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=okeedXcuCjI
 

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Aug 12, 2020 2:50 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
R5 Advanced User Guide here:
https://gdlp01.c-wss.com/gds/9/03000396 ... _v1_EN.pdf
 

by Neilyb on Tue Aug 18, 2020 6:22 am
User avatar
Neilyb
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2763
Joined: 7 Feb 2008
Location: Munich
I am quite impressed with the R5 from the reviews I have seen. I am not likely to record video for more than a few minutes so the "time limit" to recording at higher bit rates would not be a problem. From a purely photographic point of view I think Canon are doing it right and the AF looks to be among the best on any mirrorless so far.

I might wait and opt for the R6 though as I am interested in high ISO and quite happy with the R for landscapes.
 

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Aug 18, 2020 1:51 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
Eye AF comparison, also you can see how Canon is handling blackout which was a big problem for the R but not the R5:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EG9FYeOay-Q
 

by Swissblad on Wed Aug 19, 2020 8:12 am
User avatar
Swissblad
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2434
Joined: 17 Jun 2016
Jan Wegener has also added his view regarding bird photography - interesting.

https://youtu.be/5vyq304j4wE
 

by OntPhoto on Wed Aug 19, 2020 12:08 pm
User avatar
OntPhoto
Forum Contributor
Posts: 7039
Joined: 9 Dec 2006
Location: Ottawa, Ontario. Canada.
I'm sitting back and waiting to see how the R5 and R6 pans out, I just need the R6. Video isn't my thing other than for family related stuff. Is there any reason for choosing a 5D MK4 given the R5 and R6? In some image comparison sites, I see that in some examples the 5D MK4 seems to produce a cleaner very high ISO than the R5 and R6. Am I seeing right? Is this possible?
 

by Neilyb on Wed Aug 19, 2020 3:12 pm
User avatar
Neilyb
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2763
Joined: 7 Feb 2008
Location: Munich
I checked the DPreview image comparisons. R6 matching basically the 1Dx3 at all ISO's up to 12k. It is way ahead of the R and very tempting for my lowlight raptors. The R5 looks to be slightly ahead of the R, but not by much (does have 50% more pixels so impressive all the same).

Since I find the R matches my 5D4 for noise (slightly less DR, weirdly) I think the R5 would be the same and the R6 a stop ahead at least (down at ISO 6400).
 

by sdaconsulting on Mon Aug 24, 2020 8:37 am
sdaconsulting
Forum Contributor
Posts: 579
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Location: Moncure, NC
E.J. Peiker wrote:
absu wrote:Dual gain for Nikon D850, D750 and also Sony 7R mark IV & A9 is kicking in at ISO 800 for R5 it is in ISO 400. So no of unusable ISO in Nikon & Sony is more   than Canon IMHO. It is also may be noted it is the first time I have seen dynamic range of Canon camera is higher than Sony & Nikon at Base ISO. It is remarkable achievement & good news for Canon  landscape photographer .
You have to be careful with that.  The D850's base ISO is 64 not 100 so you have to shift the graph 2/3 of a stop to make an actual DR comparison and when you do that it is virtually identical.  Also it seems that the R5's dual gain has a much stronger secondary gain stage that kicks in at 400.  The a7R3 kicks in at 640 and the a7R4 at 500. Here's a comparison of the D850, a7R4 and R5.  I've also added the best camera there is, the Phase IQ150 for reference.  Of course it costs more than 10 times as much:  

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%20R5,Nikon%20D850,Phase%20One%20IQ4%20150MP,Sony%20ILCE-7RM4

The differences between the three (not including the Phase One) are essentially negligible which means that Canon has finally caught up in DR on the R5 after trailing significantly since 2008 but it must be noted that Sony does it with significantly higher resolution so their sensor design is still about a generation ahead as the Canon more or less matches the older a7R3 in resolution:

https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/ ... 0ILCE-7RM3

Note:  For those wondering why the numbers depicted in the graphs are about two stops lower than what is claimed by the manufacturers, it is because this is photographic dynamic range not theoretical dynamic range.  Photographic dynamic range is defined as the point where the signal to noise ratio is 20:1 which is about the minimum useable before noise overpowers detail.  Manufacturers use theoretical dynamic range which is a where the signal to noise ratio becomes 1:1 - of course if the signal and the noise are the same, you can not discern the signal from the noise.  For this reason, the photographic dynamic range is a much more useful measure to photographers.

Note 2:  Some may ask how does a 150 megapixel back with a similar pixel size to the 61mp a7R4 have so much more dynamic range?  This is primarily due to two things: 1. 16 bit readout rather than 14 bit readout; 2. active cooling of the sensor and CPU rather than passive cooling.
1) Pretty sure the A7R4 secondary gain kicks in at ISO 320 not 500.

2) Pretty sure Bill Claff's PDR tests are normalized with regards to resolution. So the primary reason 150 MP digital backs have better PDR is much larger capture area, and then their images are downsampled to be the same resolution as smaller sensor cameras. I think the 16 bit and active cooling is a less important factor.

3) Many people have cited that Canon "cheats" on low ISO DR tests by applying noise reduction to the RAW file at low ISOs. So unless that is inaccurate, they are not really fully competitive with the Sony sensors just yet.

4) It does look like Canon's animal / bird eye detect AF is better than Sony's at this point. I've read their tracking AF is still not up to the A9 though.
Matthew Cromer
 

by SantaFeJoe on Mon Aug 24, 2020 11:19 am
User avatar
SantaFeJoe
Forum Contributor
Posts: 8622
Joined: 28 Jan 2012
Location: Somewhere Out In The Wilds
Hack seems to indicate overheating problem may be artificial:

https://petapixel.com/2020/08/24/simple ... rtificial/

Joe
Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist.  -Pablo Picasso
 

by E.J. Peiker on Mon Aug 24, 2020 1:10 pm
User avatar
E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor
Posts: 86761
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002
sdaconsulting wrote:1) Pretty sure the A7R4 secondary gain kicks in at ISO 320 not 500.
You are correct and the graph appears to have changed since the camera was originally released, the original ones may have not been based on a production level camera.  I failed to float over the jump point just going with what was the case a year ago.  Sorry about that.
 

by lockpj on Fri Sep 04, 2020 7:15 am
lockpj
Forum Contributor
Posts: 5
Joined: 22 Nov 2016
Location: London
E.J. Peiker wrote:Studying the dynamic range for the R5 camera, it is quite good but basically ISO 200, 250 and 320 are useless.  It is absolutely pointless to use those ISOs because they are worse than ISO 400 (it would indicate that they are also worse for noise) due to the dual gain design of the sensor.  If you need a higher ISO than 160, your next step should be 400, after that it decays as expected as you go higher:
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/ ... 20EOS%20R5
Is it normal for the dynamic range to be that much lower when shooting using an electronic rather than a mechanical shutter at lower ISOs? The photonstophotos site indicates this is the case for the R5 though does not publish electronic shutter readings for most other cameras.
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
103 posts | 
  

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group