quick!- Canon 5d mark IV $1500 or Canon 5r.... $3800 quickly

[LEAKYSEALS951]

Well??????Spaulding.... I can see pros for both. Thoughts?

EDIT- decent deal on 5dIV. Is it a R5? Nope. Is an R5 2+k better? hmmmmm....

[LEAKYSEALS951]

Never mind. I tried to delete.

[GH85Carrera]

We have the Canon 5DSR and it is amazing. It shoots a 50 mega pixel image (8688x5792 pixels) and if I save a image in tif file format is is a 143 MB file.

We just printed a 40x60 for a client of their "campus" and surrounding area with downtown OKC in the background and it is just amazing. We used to use a 2.25" x 2.75" (6x7 cm) film camera to shoot those photos and the 120 frame of film has been surpassed in quality by a 35mm size frame of pixels.

I have worked as professional in photography since I was 15 and the rise of digital totally revolutionized everything. It would require a 4x5 frame of film to surpass the quality of a single shutter click of the new digital cameras. And the 4x5 frame of film would have to be perfectly exposed, from a tripod. Not just a hand held happy snap.

[LEAKYSEALS951]

We just got a dental microscope, so I've been looking at cameras again for work to hook into that.
The full frame dslr's are too much for the dental scope- so I ordered an older cropped 50d camera for work- which is plenty- but- this process as always opens up the rabbithole.

My current 5Diii has a short and drains the batteries, even if off- so it needs service.

There's a 5dsr for sale nearby as well, and I'm thinking about that too.
Seems like that's the ticket for stills, and bulb photography and such.

The 5dIV doesn't have the megapixels of the 5dsr (at 30) but seems to have better video and low light use.

Then, mirrorless, the R5- my god, the autofocus on that thing is amazing, with 40 megapixels it tracks the eyes with about 10 bazillion focal points. It's like squirrel hunting with a heat seeking missile.

It's like the companies provide so many models on purpose to make the consumer insane with choices.

I saw a 5DIV on FB yesterday for $1500, spoke with the person, but have not heard back. I'm almost thinking scam at this point. They are at very least squirrely.

On CL is a $1200 grey market 5Dsr with low useage. I'm concerned the camera's low useage was because their other cameras were more versatile for day to day/wedding/ type stuff.

I'm wondering if I should pick them up, or pony up for the 5r and be done with it (for the next 5 yrs or so)

To many choices!

[GH85Carrera]

Yea, the naming schemes Canon uses is hard to keep straight unless you are really into it. Sorta like the model names for 911s that jump around from 911 to 964 to 996 and so on.

We like it for all the megapixels and the possibility of making huge prints. Just snap the photo in RAW mode, open in Photoshop and we have a 40x60 image at 144.8 Pixel per inch. Even at a few inches viewing distance there is no pixelization at all, and 40x60s are best viewed from a dozen feet or more. Our customers love them and the send us money so we love them.

[LEAKYSEALS951]

I bet in your application it's amazing.

I'm thinking the 5DIV is out, so it's the 5Dsr vs the r5. The r5 is a do it all and at 40+ megapixels, not far off the resolution of the 5dsr, but the 5dsr is soooo much cheaper and I could just go for a nice drive and pick it up.


Silly Wabbit(hole).

R

[GH85Carrera]

Yea, if you are not needing huge megapixels it is pointless to have a camera that shoots them.

One of my friends is a realtor. She wanted advice on what camera to buy for posting on her web page. The camera store guy was pushing for the high end Nikon full sensor and expensive zoom lens. I told her to use her iPhone 11 Pro and forget a camera. The three lenses are amazing and way more than ever will be needed for a web page. She is not trying to get photos in some high end magazine full page spread, just a web page.

[john70t]

Originally Posted by GH85Carrera

I have worked as professional in photography sice I was 15 and the rise of digital totally revolutionized everything.

A hollywood directory mentioned in the extras that digital captures all the dark shadowed areas, so that set lighting techniques have to be adjusted.

[LEAKYSEALS951]

Between patients I have been taking a crash course in video (and there WILL be a quiz later damnit!!!!
).

One patient I know, is a professional photographer for a local music icon. The photographer swears by Sony. I must profess, I know very little of video. He's an awesome guy who brings his camera in every time for the specific effect to make me drool and win me over from canon with some lense converters. I love his sony (shhh!!!..... but don't tell him that).

And that I do.... but back to Canon

The r5 has"heating" issues at 8k. Mind you, I use a flip phone, which hasn't overheated since 2004, but it's important to know what I'm getting into.

Ultimately, I want a camera I can grow with. I mainly want pics. I think 45mp is good in my books. The squirrely canon 5Dmark IV chick is out (because of her, not the camera). 5Ds (50 megapix) is still in the running, but I want to look at where I can go, not what a good deal I got.

I'm still learning! Me sthmarth.... lol....

Edit- my longest YT video is 29 minutes. Overheating should not matter. Hmmmm



Later, after the blathering, is where this all leads. This moon shot is where my 5D mark II with a 400 2.8 was years ago in picture mode. Now, here we are in video mode, and you can see the moon moving in orbit real time,

[GH85Carrera]

Originally Posted by john70t

A hollywood directory mentioned in the extras that digital captures all the dark shadowed areas, so that set lighting techniques have to be adjusted.

Yep. Digital can capture detail in the dark shadows, and in the brightest highlight and white parts. Film just can't capture that dynamic range.

One of the aerial cameras that is popular is the 150 megapixel unit. It is a bit pricey at 55 grand and up.

[nota]

personally unless there is a real reason for the latest greatest ect

I would hunt for a used 3 or 4 model for a fraction of the new model's price
and likely 90% of the function

[Scott Douglas]

I've been assimilated by the Sony bug. The 24mp models work for me, but I deep down still want an A1. These are my triplets.

[LEAKYSEALS951]

Thanks for the responses-

Just got back from a wedding. I went and harassed the photography crew.

The lead photographer was sporting a 5dIII (what I have). She swears by it. So do I (If not the perpetual battery drain short which needs attention.

The lead videographer was using a sony. His first reponse-
"what are you using it for?" Pics?= canon Video?= sony

As far a scientific study goes- I should wait for the pics from the venue, and see where I look sexiest in the white person dance party!!!!. That SHOULD be the camera I'd buy.

Personally, if the 5d3 didn't have a short, I'd stick with it for a bit longer.
B&H is having a jewish holiday until next month, which I like, b/c it gives me time to decompress and think things over.

I truly get the idea of being 1 or two steps off the high end latest and greatest to get the honey pot of a deal.

Canon 5d4 lady called back, and wanted a sale, but is going on vacation this week. Again- another opportunity to cool down and think it through, although... the r5 gives me some cool stuff. With r5, I see advantages. With 5d4, I see small improvements, improvements, but only gradual.- not earth shattering stuff.

r5 checks off boxes.

45megapixels
Otherworldly focusing (even better than the "pretty damn good" 61 point 5d3)
Higher frame rates.
More than I can handle video
Better ISO ranges.
Compatability with my L lense collection

It's hitting the marks at this point. Honestly, I did try to call b&h last night, but they were on their holiday, so I consider it a good opportunity to calm down and pontificate

(those are beautiful cameras Scott!)