PhotonsToPhotos does the Canon EOS R5 Mark II and it’s good

#201
Richard CR said:
for static?

yeah just use AEB and call it a day.
Click to expand...

For anything newer than the 5DIV, I find that AEB provides not much assistance unless you're really trying to subvert the look of the image. Dark areas still need to be dark, bright areas still need to be bright ... pictures with shadows that aren't really shadows just look weird.

Get a scene you've used AEB for, then compare what you get using Photoshop from that with a picture that is photographed as far to the right as possible without blowouts.
 
Upvote 0
#203
David_B said:
For anything newer than the 5DIV, I find that AEB provides not much assistance unless you're really trying to subvert the look of the image. Dark areas still need to be dark, bright areas still need to be bright ... pictures with shadows that aren't really shadows just look weird.

Get a scene you've used AEB for, then compare what you get using Photoshop from that with a picture that is photographed as far to the right as possible without blowouts.
Click to expand...

yes. there's no point in going to 20 EV or anything and creating a world with 5 suns behind you - but for static objects, there are easy ways of getting around dynamic range issues.

not even sure what static objects would need high DR, but I'm sure I'm just not thinking it through this morning.
 
Upvote 0
#206
Richard CR said:
yes. there's no point in going to 20 EV or anything and creating a world with 5 suns behind you - but for static objects, there are easy ways of getting around dynamic range issues.
[…]
Click to expand...
Be careful to not conflate (H)DR and tonemapping. You can shoot a 20EV bracket and have it look normal, just with no noise in the shadows and the option to pull back highlights from clipping in your presentation medium.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#207
neuroanatomist said:
Real estate shots - relatively dim interior, bright daylight through open windows. Just as an example.
Click to expand...
When I shoot this type of thing, I use lights. I dont know of any real estate photographer that wouldn't. I haven't been in that game with much seriousness for a number of years, mind - but I would wager its still the best solution to get these shots. It would be risky to attempt to rely on DR and walk away with anything professional looking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
#208
neuroanatomist said:
Real estate shots - relatively dim interior, bright daylight through open windows. Just as an example.
Click to expand...

Also, lots of wildlife stuff when in canopy. Got a shot last week of a great horned owl that's unusable for other reasons, but I used all 11-12 stops of DR just getting the bird in the dark treetop without blowing highlights with dappled leaves and branches. One of my favorite shots a couple years back was rejected from a photo contest because elements of a waterfall were blown out. I couldn't bracket because it was a huge pano. Less than 10 percent of my shots are using the full dynamic range, but it saves me sometimes.

I'm getting the R5II mostly for the improved image quality in electronic shutter. Big gain there. Would have loved a higher-res option, but I'll take it. I'm slightly skeptical of the eye-tracking stuff after my R3 experience, but could see me using it for some narrow applications, like nighthawks hunting over fields.

When interviewing Bill Claff a couple years ago for a project on unsung photo community heros (yes, Bill, still coming), and we had a long conversation about "cooking" of photos. His take then - which I might need to update - was that it was more common than not, but sometimes difficult to determine where the cooking was putting a thumb on the noise scale versus other needed signal processing. The vibe I got from him was that the cooking issue ship sailed back in the dearly 1dx days, and we're all swimming in those waters now whether we like it or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#210
Benjamin_L said:
\"The EOS R5 using a mechanical shutter is a little more noisy and shows less DR than the EOS R5 does\"

some Mark II missing here
Click to expand...
You must be use a glas to see the differences. That's are so light, that i don't see an advantage between the r5 and the r5II sensors.
It's could be that the R5II Sensor is faster, consumes less power, and is a litte bit less noisy. But this differences are not that onbe, that would me think about to sell my r5 and get an r5II. The R5II has other features that are more relevant, but not for my photographic activity.
I personaly don't have an advantage with the R5II.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#211
Juppeck said:
You must be use a glas to see the differences. That's are so light, that i don't see an advantage between the r5 and the r5II sensors.
It's could be that the R5II Sensor is faster, consumes less power, and is a litte bit less noisy. But this differences are not that onbe, that would me think about to sell my r5 and get an r5II. The R5II has other features that are more relevant, but not for my photographic activity.
I personaly don't have an advantage with the R5II.
Click to expand...
Why are you quoting me? I have been reporting a typo in the text
 
Upvote 0
#212
Richard CR said:
The A1 i guess? is the camera's competitor in sony's realm - but even then, it's in a another price bracket. I orignally didn't have the A9 III in there, , it was just put in there because if I didn't - I know some would go "where is the A9 III????!!"

I mentioned this with the Z 8 - maybe i should have added something to the A9 III - I may

You don't have the option to "turn off" the global shutter on the A9 III to use it as a general-purpose tool, that's not Canon's problem and it's still nearly $2000 more and still doesn't shoot lower than ISO 200. Again, some people shoot lower than ISO 200 - can the A9 III? well no. Canon has the ability if you need more DR to switch to mechanical shutter - can you do that with the Sony? well no. Who's problem is that? Canon's?

if you are shooting sports, etc you are mostly shooting > ISO 800 and there is no difference, with the exception of readout speed and price.
Click to expand...
Not to nitpick but in my field digital teching for magazine, catalog, and advertising, I would argue that the competition to the R5 and R5ii is the A7R5, in that it's the highest mp camera from each manufacturer, and it has very competitive DR. Personally I don't like the color out of the Sony, especially above 320iso, but it is very competitive in DR, and the A7R5 is less expensive.

Screenshot 2024-08-19 at 3.33.46 PM.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#213
SilverBox said:
Not to nitpick but in my field digital teching for magazine, catalog, and advertising, I would argue that the competition to the R5 and R5ii is the A7R5, in that it's the highest mp camera from each manufacturer, and it has very competitive DR. Personally I don't like the color out of the Sony, especially above 320iso, but it is very competitive in DR, and the A7R5 is less expensive.

View attachment 219233
Click to expand...
Price wise the a7r5 is definitely closer. But capability / tech spec wise r5ii, A1, and Z8 all seem to be cut from the same cloth. Canon doesnt really make a camera that would target what the A7R5 and Z7II target (though if they keep the original R5 around, that could fill that role nicely for now)
 
Upvote 0
#214
SilverBox said:
Not to nitpick but in my field digital teching for magazine, catalog, and advertising, I would argue that the competition to the R5 and R5ii is the A7R5, in that it's the highest mp camera from each manufacturer, and it has very competitive DR. Personally I don't like the color out of the Sony, especially above 320iso, but it is very competitive in DR, and the A7R5 is less expensive.
Click to expand...
except I wouldn't - because the A7R5 lacks the speed that R5 Mark II has in both terms of the readout speed, just fps - because of that - it's far closer to an A1. I tried to make sure that people were aware that it's that speed that drives some of the sensor compromises. When you look at the specs of the A1 and compare to the R5 Mark II - they are quite close.

I'd say that Canon lacks a competitor to the A7R5 - which would be a high MP R5s camera and I've certainly whined that we need an R5s ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#215
neuroanatomist said:
Real estate shots - relatively dim interior, bright daylight through open windows. Just as an example.
Click to expand...

Not really, anyone worthwhile knows how to light those scenes. Sure they'll take whatever the camera gives in regards to DR, but the good ones care more about their lights than their sensor. You'd need something 20+ to even make dealing with windows workable without lights if you don't want to blow them out.

SilverBox said:
Not to nitpick but in my field digital teching for magazine, catalog, and advertising, I would argue that the competition to the R5 and R5ii is the A7R5, in that it's the highest mp camera from each manufacturer, and it has very competitive DR. Personally I don't like the color out of the Sony, especially above 320iso, but it is very competitive in DR, and the A7R5 is less expensive.

View attachment 219233
Click to expand...

Magazines? Most are printed poorly so DR doesn't matter.

Anything like a Vogue or Vanity Fair shoot would be on Phase One or Hasselblad backs... no one serious would be using either the R52 or A7R5 if they're being commissioned for jobs like that. Advertising.. same thing if it's for LVMH or Brunello...

Bob's transmission shop advertisements? Sure.

The A7R5 is toy compared to the R52 if you consider the sum of their parts. Well, when comparing Sony cameras to Nikon or Canon in their segments... they're all toys.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#216
Richard CR said:
except I wouldn't - because the A7R5 lacks the speed that R5 Mark II has in both terms of the readout speed, just fps - because of that - it's far closer to an A1. I tried to make sure that people were aware that it's that speed that drives some of the sensor compromises. When you look at the specs of the A1 and compare to the R5 Mark II - they are quite close.

I'd say that Canon lacks a competitor to the A7R5 - which would be a high MP R5s camera and I've certainly whined that we need an R5s ;)
Click to expand...
When shooting tethered at 100iso with strobe that speed isn't really a factor. As you say the high mp is the reason I would say the R5 is an A7R competitor.

Canon Rumors Guy said:
Bob's transmission shop advertisements? Sure.

The A7R5 is toy compared to the R52 if you consider the sum of their parts. Well, when comparing Sony cameras to Nikon or Canon in their segments... they're all toys.
Click to expand...

I am in the midwest where there are plenty of serious studios and shooters using Canon, Sony, and Fuji. Sports Illustrated and the NFL are a mixture of Canon and Sony. Phase has gone out of fashion because the depth of field is paper thin, the autofocus is terrible, and the cost of entry is sky high. Land's End is still shooting Phase 150s on Cambo bodies with Bron packs but that is an outlier.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#217
mmmm said:
When I shoot this type of thing, I use lights. I dont know of any real estate photographer that wouldn't. I haven't been in that game with much seriousness for a number of years, mind - but I would wager its still the best solution to get these shots. It would be risky to attempt to rely on DR and walk away with anything professional looking.
Click to expand...

This is the difference between a practising expert and the Internet armchair expert. The same applies to jello from sensor read out times - experts in the various fields work such as to eliminate it, whereas youtubers whine there and on forums.
 
Upvote 0
#218
SilverBox said:
I am in the midwest where there are plenty of serious studios and shooters using Canon, Sony, and Fuji. Sports Illustrated and the NFL are a mixture of Canon and Sony. Phase has gone out of fashion because the depth of field is paper thin, the autofocus is terrible, and the cost of entry is sky high. Land's End is still shooting Phase 150s on Cambo bodies with Bron packs but that is an outlier.
Click to expand...

Yet all of the Canon/Sony/Nikon fanbois want f/1.0 lenses despite it meaning having a thin DoF. You'd almost be forgiven that being a fanboi means you don't actually take photos or video.
 
Upvote 0
#220
Sensor wise, an issue a colleague had using his R5 for copy work was that after about 3hrs of shooting tethered he noticed a shift in color temperature rendering with locked manual settings, and went down a whole testing rabbit hole to find a camera that didn't shift over 8 hours of tethered shooting and settled on the A7Riv.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
PhotonsToPhotos does the Canon EOS R5 Mark II and it’s good.
Replies
1
Views
336
Viggo
Viggo
Richard CR
Canon EOS R5 Mark II Assumes it’s Rightful Ranking at Map Camera
Replies
10
Views
691
Ryrock77
R
Richard CR
Kolari tears down the Canon EOS R5 Mark II
Replies
41
Views
2K
MikeGalos
MikeGalos
Canon Rumors
There is no longer a shortage of the Canon EOS R1 and EOS R5 Mark II
Replies
19
Views
851
reisi007
reisi007
Richard CR
Canon releases the Canon EOS R5 Mark II User Manual
Replies
116
Views
9K
Nemorino
Nemorino
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu