[dugaut]

if you're invested in canon lenses it's not a bad choice to buy the 5ds/r

it's not that the 5ds/r can't take incredible photos, but I think the 645z will perform excellently in a wider range of situations (low light or if you need the extra dr)

I'm already invested in canon and nikon so when I decided to buy the 645z I told my self just get a couple of lenses, used, and don't start spending a lot of money.

Well, then came a flash, thinking about another lens, etc. So for me, it's costing more than I initially figured.

The point being, if you're already invested in some decent canon glass, it's yet another way of entering "medium format" land, which is what has been said about the 645z vs the much more expensive Hasseblad's etc.

I just took a landscape shot over the weekend with the 645z and printed it at 22x17 on my epson 3880 and I can't get over the detail.

In the conditions I shot, not a lot of dr, sunlight so low iso, the canon would have yielded an equally stunning print I imagine since dr and iso weren't a challenge.

Everything is evolving. I now am starting to think more about were I can use my iphone for more casual situations vs a dslr and get some pretty good images. A few years ago I didn't even own a smartphone dismissing them as toys.

[JohnBee]

You could also use image stacking for superresolution to get added DR, lower noise and of course, more detail than 645z native resolution. Not ideal(that I know), but a viable option, nonetheless.

[JinDesu]

Yeah but then you could do the same with the 645z...

[JohnBee]

Yeah but then you could do the same with the 645z...

Taking the 5DS R into account, I'd say this is more about bringing MF image quality to the poor man than it would be at improving MF per say.

[JinDesu]

Yeah but I wouldn't necessarily call a person with a Canon 5DS R a poor man

Maybe a not-as-rich man

[JohnBee]

Yeah but I wouldn't necessarily call a person with a Canon 5DS R a poor man

Maybe a not-as-rich man

poor man's

A knock-off of inferior quality, or something similar to something else, but not as good.
Mr. Ed is the poor man's John Kerry, since he has the same face but inferior public-speaking skills.

Jared was horrified when he remembered going home wasted with a Jessica Alba look-alike, then woke up the next morning naked next to the poor man's Rosie O'Donnell.

That said, the 645z is a very expensive kit to own for most people.
I've myself have tried many times to buy into one, only to be cut down to size every single time.

And so now, I'll likely wait for Sony's A9 or A99II to accept that I too will likely end-up with the poor man's MF solution also.
Though I'm fairly certain 75MP and 18 stops of DR would be more than enough for most anyone shooting landscapes etc.

[JinDesu]

Go with the 645d~

Actually that does bring up a thought, how does the 645d compare to the Canon 5DS R in high ISO and DR etc? Most people who own both the D and the Z say the resolution difference is minute, so you could get just as much resolution out of a 645d.. but it's known for weaker high ISO etc.

But the CCD sensor also has a lot of fans and the prices are in the 3-4k range nowadays.

[JohnBee]

Go with the 645d~

Actually that does bring up a thought, how does the 645d compare to the Canon 5DS R in high ISO and DR etc? Most people who own both the D and the Z say the resolution difference is minute, so you could get just as much resolution out of a 645d.. but it's known for weaker high ISO etc.

But the CCD sensor also has a lot of fans and the prices are in the 3-4k range nowadays.

Nah, it's still way too expensive for me.
Believe me, I've scoured that pan more times than I could count.
Fact is, I'll never justify a 25-30K kit no matter how I slice it.
My shooting needs are simply too diverse to pull it off, and I have no interest in shooting multiple mounts.
And so... Photoacute is my salvation for high MP/fidelity photography.

[JinDesu]

That's surprising that the 645D kit would still be so expensive. It's because of the medium format AF lenses right?

Photoacute (and zerene, and PS5 stacking) on my computer is such a resource hog I only do stacking/panos when I really really want to..

[JohnBee]

That's surprising that the 645D kit would still be so expensive. It's because of the medium format AF lenses right?

Photoacute (and zerene, and PS5 stacking) on my computer is such a resource hog I only do stacking/panos when I really really want to..

Yes, on the lenses. Too true on the multi image processing software also.
I just recently had to upgrade my RAM from 16 to 32GB for Photoshop due to larger images. Though even with a newer workstation, Photo Acute renders it inoperable during processing. Which is a royal pain.
Luckilly, I don't use image stacking and stitching software very often, and so it's not so bad. But I might feel differently if this was something I did commonly.

One thing Photo Acute should consider, is network computation. Which could be very helpful in cases such as these. ie, I often use network rendering with keyshot and the advantages are phenomenal.

[JohnBee]

Just for fun, and mostly because I just had to see for myself, here are some 5DS R vs Pentax 645z comparison samples:
















PS. As usual and to keep things interesting, I took the liberty of mix/matching the samples. Though more importantly... I've decided to hold an ace up my sleeve on this one

[2351HD]

This is excellent. As I was saying, the 5DsR will be more than capable and will be a fine camera. If DR is as good or better than the 645D then it will be just fine.

[texandrews]

Just for fun, and mostly because I just had to see for myself, here are some 5DS R vs Pentax 645z comparison samples:
















PS. As usual and to keep things interesting, I took the liberty of mix/matching the samples. Though more importantly... I've decided to hold an ace up my sleeve on this one

Well, this will be interesting! Looks to me like, rez-wise, it may come down to:

• what lens is used
• what sharpening is applied
• what raw conversion works best
• under what conditions optimum rez is to be had

I can see some differences here, interestingly not the same across every crop. The next question is about the iso performance (and the Canon is capped at 6400, I believe, which I thought was an odd move by them) and the DR range and performance.


But based on the above, it looks like people invested in the Canon system can breath a sigh of relief if rez alone is their main concern, or if they want to add a body for that purpose.

This comparison makes me more interested in what Sony has coming over the next few months.

[72ndPoolShark]

This is a nice comparison, but I would really love to compare these shots in their RAW forms. In particular, how elastic each file is. Yes you can get a bit of an idea of this as many have pointed out the NR applied to the Canon 6400, but I'd like to see how much you can recover in shadow and highlight for each camera. Trying this to the JPGs is pointless.

In the end this is like comparing a V8 engine with 300hp to a V6 with 300hp. The V6 will have to work much harder to get there and there will be less understood advantages to the V8, like torque and power curves. FF systems at the 50mp range seem at or close to their limit. The EF 50mm Macro lens used in this comparison certainly is a very good lens but venture past the normal range and see what happens. Sure 5k is a steep price for the Pentax UW but I'm betting a comparison of that lens against ANY comparable wide for FF would be very dramatic in favor of the 645z.

[JohnBee]

This is a nice comparison, but I would really love to compare these shots in their RAW forms. In particular, how elastic each file is. Yes you can get a bit of an idea of this as many have pointed out the NR applied to the Canon 6400, but I'd like to see how much you can recover in shadow and highlight for each camera. Trying this to the JPGs is pointless.

In the end this is like comparing a V8 engine with 300hp to a V6 with 300hp. The V6 will have to work much harder to get there and there will be less understood advantages to the V8, like torque and power curves. FF systems at the 50mp range seem at or close to their limit. The EF 50mm Macro lens used in this comparison certainly is a very good lens but venture past the normal range and see what happens. Sure 5k is a steep price for the Pentax UW but I'm betting a comparison of that lens against ANY comparable wide for FF would be very dramatic in favor of the 645z.

My advice would be to download the RAW files from each system and compare them. Though I found the 5DS R low ISO files to contain enough noise to warrant taking extra steps to subdue it. Which will likely come at the expense of the camera's usable DR threshold for many people. Which isn't to say the camera couldn't be used to accomplish great things in terms of IQ. Though my take is that it may turn off alot of people who have gotten used to the added benefits of the latest sensor performances by other manufacturers. However, I must confess that given the niche this particular camera falls into, I wouldn't think many people will look at this system for high ISO work.

That said, I doubt the 5DS R was ever conceived to challenge MF systems costing twice as much either. And so, I wouldn't get too caught-up in such things personally.

My take on this is that Canon put together an affordable system that would allow their existing users to experience image captures with some of the same level of detail as those costing many times more. And by the looks of it, this is exactly what this Camera does. - Or as I like to call it, the poor man's MF alternative.

Having said all that, I'd also add that squeezing every once of detail out of these files was no walk in the park. It took alot of adjusting to get the 5DS R to put out a comparable amount of detail to that of the 645z, which could only be accomplished in RAW. Which is something that I doubt many people won't be inclined to do. And more importantly, why I maintain that this camera will likely be better suited for super-resolution type images. Of which I'm confident, it will do the job quite nicely with the added detail, dynamic range and noise performances. - limited, yes. But worth it, when it actually does hit home.