5DS R (Page 2): Very direct answer. Thank you. I spoze as IBIS equipt cameras displace SLRs there will be less problem with off-tripod landscapes and such. OTOH the pixel count will...

User ID

robertjerl wrote:

The 80D doesn't have a problem with high shutter speeds in good light. My 90D (32.5mp, pixel density over 9) on the other hand has problems at 1/2000 and below.

I mentioned it because some people don't use tripods for landscapes, slower shutter speeds because the subject isn't moving and if they aren't rock steady the problem can appear. And then they wonder what is wrong with their camera.

Very direct answer. Thank you.

I spoze as IBIS equipt cameras displace SLRs there will be less problem with off-tripod landscapes and such. OTOH the pixel count will likely creep ever higher.

BTW, you mention “pixel density over 9”. Is there a simple numeric scale in use, as with earthquakes and hurricanes, but for pixel density ?

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

User ID wrote:

Very direct answer. Thank you.

I spoze as IBIS equipt cameras displace SLRs there will be less problem with off-tripod landscapes and such. OTOH the pixel count will likely creep ever higher.

BTW, you mention “pixel density over 9”. Is there a simple numeric scale in use, as with earthquakes and hurricanes, but for pixel density ?

It is MegaPixels per square centimeter and the 90D is 9.81*, the 80D is 7.17, 5DIV is 3.48, my old 6D was 2.36 and the 5Dsr is 5.86.
You divide the total number of pixels on the sensor by its area in squire centimeters.

If you scaled the 90D sensor up to 35mm size it would have aprx. 83MP.

User ID

robertjerl wrote:

It is MegaPixels per square centimeter and the 90D is 9.81*, the 80D is 7.17, 5DIV is 3.48, my old 6D was 2.36 and the 5Dsr is 5.86.
You divide the total number of pixels on the sensor by its area in squire centimeters.

If you scaled the 90D sensor up to 35mm size it would have aprx. 83MP.

OK. An actual measure, not an arbitrary numeric scale. Seems I’ve got a number of garden variety 2.8s on hand, as would so many other users of FF 24MP sensors.

Got some Sony 1.4s for “night vision”. A rather interesting coincidence as relates to f/stops and low light ability. Thanks.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

User ID wrote:

OK. An actual measure, not an arbitrary numeric scale. Seems I’ve got a number of garden variety 2.8s on hand, as would so many other users of FF 24MP sensors.

Got some Sony 1.4s for “night vision”. A rather interesting coincidence as relates to f/stops and low light ability. Thanks.

My favorite birding camera for hand held work is a 7DII, I have owned two over the years. Its pixel density is 6 so if you get in close and fill the frame so you don't have to crop it puts more pixels on subject than the 5Dsr by just a hair.

User ID

robertjerl wrote:

My favorite birding camera for hand held work is a 7DII, I have owned two over the years. Its pixel density is 6 so if you get in close and fill the frame so you don't have to crop it puts more pixels on subject than the 5Dsr by just a hair.

The previous owner of my SR apparently did birds from the same distance as you, but chose to adjust framing after the fact. He told me that for him 50MP was largely about cropping.

robertjerl Loc: Corona, California

User ID wrote:

The previous owner of my SR apparently did birds from the same distance as you, but chose to adjust framing after the fact. He told me that for him 50MP was largely about cropping.

If you do birds then cropping is often a fact of life as the little suckers insist on flying to a spot you have trouble getting close enough. I use an aps-c with 400 to 600mm lenses and often a 1.4x added on but they still often pick a spot about 5 yards or so further than I want them. I think they take classes in how to do that.

Fortunately those around parks and yard feeders will often get used to people and let you get closer. Especially in the parks where they see a lot of people, many of whom are giving out free food.
I have found that in my favorite park for water birds (and others) the best spot where they let you get close and some even come right up to you and demand to be fed is right next to the "Do Not Feed The Ducks" sign. That is where I see the most people feeding the ducks and scattering bird seed in the grass.

User ID

robertjerl wrote:

If you do birds then cropping is often a fact of l... (show quote)

Round here the wildlife ain’t very wild. They’re kinda urbanized. It’s not like they’re tame, but they’re not really skittish. No one feeds them, except the “squirrel lady”. She seems unaware that she’s indirectly feeding the eagles.

MrBob Loc: lookout Mtn. NE Alabama

Hey Guys/Gals, thought I would give you a followup on my Inquiry question... First of all thanks for the comments and as always, spirited discussion.Sure beats arguing with the Spouses. Actually I kind of came to my senses and added to my Olympus gear with the E-M1 Mark2 body. 949.00 from B&H and will complement my other Oly gear... No, I don't care how dead M43 is said to be, I like it for various reasons as well as my Canon stuff. I even love my iPhone camera, as its with me all the time, and for taking impromptu shots its invaluable. Now I can put the 12-40 on the new body and the 75 on the older body...Thanks again for the responses; always interesting info to be learned around here...

User ID

MrBob wrote:

Hey Guys/Gals, thought I would give you a followup... (show quote)

Don’t worry about the future of m43. It’s often disparaged by geeks and elitists. They have big mouths online but when the marketing departments count noses, geeks and elitists are mostly absent.

At the Big Box photo section display, Canon and Nikon are looking sparse but Sony and m43 are solidly represented. The Big Box shows you whatz moving in quantity. Quantity is what keeps stuff in production.

Garty Northrop Loc: SE Washington State

I have used the 5DS R with the 100mm -- 400mm II for several years, and
not is a great combination for most everything except closeups. Great resolution.