No. It won't make any difference for viewing on any size of monitor. As for viewing on cell phones—my goodness, the oldest most limited digital camera would be more than adequate for that.
A while ago I exhibited 20 x 30 prints at a gallery. Some were taken with my 5D MKIII and others with a 1D MK III which has 10 mp compared with 22 mp for the 5D MKIII. I could not detect any quality difference between these two cameras. That surprised me as I imagined it would be easy to tell them apart. The difference between 50 and 30 mp is far less.
Thanks for the input. Much appreciated.
Hello everyone.
As is obvious, this is yet another 5DS(R) vs 5D Mark IV query. My intended area of usage is strictly stills for viewing on computers and smartphones.
Minus the higher MP count, the 5D4 seems the obvious choice. So please let me know of any and every advantage I might avail with the extra 20MP so that I may weigh my options and make an informed decision.
And yes, image quality is of high priority to me. But not if the extra pixels don't make a difference on monitors and phones.
Thank you.
When it comes to the needed resolution for large prints it comes done to viewing distance. Photographers tend to over rate the need for resolution so I was very gratefull when one on my photoshop instructors was a graphic artist. It turns out graphic artist study what the eye can resolve and how that's impacted by viewing distance.
I never print larger than 20 x 30 inches so I'm fine with 22MP placed on a wall for viewing at 4 feet. If you hung the same print in a narrow hallway viewing at 2 feet could get iffy. I think the 5DIV might even pull that off.
The graphic artist / instuctor was doing 20 foot tall ceiling product banners from 8.2 mega pixel raw files for hanging in Las Vegas connvention center.
I have 11.25 TB connected to this notebook and can't imagine what I'd need had I been shooting a 5DS(R) for the last 6 years, so I say go ahead and get the 5DIV.
--
Phil Agur
“Imagination is more important than knowledge..." -- Albert Einstein
The larger files hindering my workflow is a worrying matter. Especially when I won't be reaping the benefits of 50MP for every single image, but the hindrance in workflow due to larger file size will be there for every single image.
Thank you.
While I love the 5D4, it cannot do this:
Heavy crop from a JPG straight out of camera.
--
http://eyvindness.zenfolio.com/
This is one of the prime reasons 50MP is a boon for me. More often than not, I end up cropping photos in post to some extent or the other, although never as heavily as you have in this particular instance.
But then again, these sorts of will be necessary only in a few photos whereas the hindrance in workflow due to larger file size will be there for every single image. So I will lose out on some of these occasional winners via cropping but will gain a much better workflow by going with the 5D Mark IV.
"Everything in photography is about trade-offs." I suppose this too will be another one of those instances.
Thank you.
Hello everyone.
As is obvious, this is yet another 5DS(R) vs 5D Mark IV query. My intended area of usage is strictly stills for viewing on computers and smartphones.
Minus the higher MP count, the 5D4 seems the obvious choice. So please let me know of any and every advantage I might avail with the extra 20MP so that I may weigh my options and make an informed decision.
And yes, image quality is of high priority to me. But not if the extra pixels don't make a difference on monitors and phones.
Thank you.
50MP adds sharpness (as the total sharpness in the image is the result of lots of blurring factors along the way, reduce one and sharpness goes up), makes noise finer grained and adds reach (by allowing a lot of cropping). Against that you get a lot of data and the 5DmkIV will be a faster operating camera. Also the 5DmkIV has more DR at low ISO (about 3/4 of a stop at ISO 100), in case you want to lift the shadows more (not that the 5Ds/sr is bad, just less good below ISO 400).
http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon EOS 5D Mark IV,Canon EOS 5DS R
Personally I love the extra reach and would't get a 5DmkIV, as you get a free 7DmkII (in reach terms, not shooting rate). However for a lot of people a 5DmkIV is a good choice, well maybe less so at the current pricing. It depends what you shoot.
Sharpness: Does it add so much sharpness that I can actually see the difference on a 4K screen?
Noise: "Finer grained" is worse than the opposite, right? Isn't that why higher MP cameras are less noise-efficient when everything else is constant?
DR: 3/4 stops at ISO 100? Isn't the difference in DR more affected at high ISOs?
Thank you for your input. Much appreciated.
Hello everyone.
As is obvious, this is yet another 5DS(R) vs 5D Mark IV query. My intended area of usage is strictly stills for viewing on computers and smartphones.
Minus the higher MP count, the 5D4 seems the obvious choice. So please let me know of any and every advantage I might avail with the extra 20MP so that I may weigh my options and make an informed decision.
And yes, image quality is of high priority to me. But not if the extra pixels don't make a difference on monitors and phones.
Thank you.
Since we are talking only on screen viewing, which is 99.9% of photo viewing these days, the 50mp 5dsr would be your choice, given your application.
For you it comes down to this....everyone pixel peeps.....everyone. Everyone is pinching in on their phones to see more detail. They are not peeping for the same reasons we photographers peep (to check out sharpness, noise, IQ), but they do peep because they want to see whats going on in the picture. ("What's that in her hair? look at those earrings! What's in the background? Look at those teeth!, Her skin is sooo perfect!, etc.).
This is done on phones as well as computer screens, with of course much more impact on a large computer screen. And flaws are even more amplified on 4k screens.
Who cares about prints. You are not interested in that at all. You can't zoom in on a print.
Assuming this is not sarcasm, wouldn't 30MP largely suffice for even pinching and zooming?
This hasn't sunk into the mass collective yet but when you put 50 MPs onto a target vs. 30 MPs, you will resolve more detail. Then, when you are downsizing to whatever print size/screen image you use, you have to be downsizing extremely small (such as a cell phone) before the 50 MP capture loses its advantage in terms of resolved detail. How small really? I dunno. If you own a 4k monitor, most folks can see the difference in 50 vs 30 when downsizing to 3840x2160. Some may not see the difference at all while others may determine that the additional resolved detail from 50 MP is "insignificant".
There may be other reasons to choose a 5D4. Dynamic range is about a half stop better. This may seem insignificant but if your images need about 1/2 stop more lift that isn't there, then it doesn't matter how small the difference is, it is still a fail. The 5D4 has other gizmos I wish the my 5DsR had.
Hello everyone.
As is obvious, this is yet another 5DS(R) vs 5D Mark IV query. My intended area of usage is strictly stills for viewing on computers and smartphones.
Minus the higher MP count, the 5D4 seems the obvious choice. So please let me know of any and every advantage I might avail with the extra 20MP so that I may weigh my options and make an informed decision.
And yes, image quality is of high priority to me. But not if the extra pixels don't make a difference on monitors and phones.
Thank you.
--
Once you've done fifty, everything else is iffy.
Rick, would it be possible to provide links that elaborate on the "more MP=more detail/resolution" matter?
