I would like to point out here a little the possibilities and limits, which brings the photographing with the “pixel bolides” – Canon 5DsR and Nikon D850 – so with itself.
1. Photography of fast-moving objects.
Since the pixel size of both cameras is around 4 μm (see the link under point 5), let’s look at a small calculation example:
A car that is about 5 meters long passes us with 36 km / h. It is taken full format, so fully mapped to 35 mm sensor width.
Since it runs at 36 km / h, equivalent to 36,000 meters (m) per 3,600 seconds (s), this is 10 m / s. That is, if we expose the car with 1 s, it has already covered 10 m = 10,000 mm in this one second. If we expose 1/1000 s, we logically have to divide that value by 1000, which still yields 10 mm.
Now suppose the car has an advertising label, then each letter within the exposure time lays back 10mm. Now our sensor is not 5 meters wide, but only 35 mm. So we need to downscale the 10mm original width to the reduction image of the sensor (ie 35mm), so at 35mm divided by 5,000mm (that’s 5 meters) is exactly 0.007mm, so the car on our sensor only moves 7 μm (1 μm = 1 micrometer, for clarification: 1000 μm are exactly 1 millimeter). However, since the sensor pixel is only about 4 microns in size, the car would already occupy two pixels, so at 100% magnification already blurred. Only the shortening of the exposure to 1/8000 s would then occupy only about one pixel. Okay, these are purely mathematical (theoretical) values. But they make it very clear to us where the boundaries are.
Therefore, even the smallest movements of the camera can lead to slight blurring and blurring, which is twice as wide for a 12 MP camera, for example the Canon 5D or Nikon D300, whose sensor pixels are about twice as wide at 8 μm , would not have had.
To stick with our car example: Of course,many cars drive faster, but they are still further away or do not drive exactly at a 90 ° angle to the camera, and this makes a lot of. If the angle to the camera is only 60 °, then the exposure time can be halved by 20%, at 45 ° by 40% and at 30 °. In good German this means nothing else, the sharper we take the car, the longer the shutter speed can be, the side, the shorter it must be! And of course, that also applies to the flower moving in the wind or the footballer on the field or the runner in the forest …
2. Depth of field
The depth of focus or depth of field is in the “pixel-bolides” downright. If we remember the chemical times (some also say “analogously”), then the so-called circle of confusion was 1/30 mm, ie the equivalent of 33 μm, which was used as the basis for a sharp image (medium format) even only 1/20 mm = 50 μm). So this circle of confusion is roughly considered something like a sensor pixel today. but all tables of the lens manufacturers were committed to this circle of confusion, since there were correct calculations and even lists and booklets, from what distance up to which distance the picture with a certain aperture at a certain focal distance became (became) sharp. The experts were even so certain that they engraved these values on the lens rings:
(Confident: In chemical photography, that was not so, there was hardly any practical way to enlarge the image to a width of 2 meters and more, in order to verify this.) Was at the 7 × 10 trigger Of course everything is sharp, even with the postcard – 10 × 15 – still.)
Of course, there were movies, like Kodachrome 25 or Reprofilme, which resolved much finer, but that was known only to the clever photographer and meant, of course, excellent lighting conditions.
Nevertheless, the depth of field in our cars is only half that of the 12-MP cameras, which of course is a direct consequence of the sensor size. And that of course requires a more accurate and accurate adjustment of sharpness. For landscape photography, manual focus is often the better option if the picture on the monitor had been previously accurately judged and adjusted.
Of course, we can increase the depth of field by reducing the aperture, but unfortunately we do not always achieve optimal results, because the diffraction of the light rays can cause even from aperture 11, a loss of sharpness and slight distortions. But even this problem is already from 20 MP, if not as clear as here.
Anyone who has carefully read the above points must realize that even the slightest vibrations or touches during the recording can lead to “tearing” or blurring the pictures. Therefore, a tripod and remote shutter release should be used for shots that require absolute sharpness. In the Canon, we can use the (ancient) IR transmitter RC-6, Nikon itself has saved so what the higher quality cameras, here help external solutions, the D850 is about Snapbrigde and WiFi; because cable release can be used on any modern camera. But not only camera shake itself is the problem, even if e.g. People can be photographed and move during the recording, depending on their proximity to the camera, even winking can make themselves felt. Even if the tripod z. B. is on a bridge and cars drive past, this can lead to vibrations. As I said, the pixel size is extremely small and short exposure times are a must. But in low light, the limits are already reached quickly at ISO 2000 here. Okay, the Canon is a touch better, but that should hardly be ausschlagend.
4. Sensor noise etc
With the low ISO values both cameras are on the same level, the noise is clearly already starting from about 800 ISO, who looks at the pictures very closely, easily recognizable, but usually with the software solutions provided by the companies themselves well under control get (Canon DPP 4 and Nikon NX-D). Okay, I do not know what else is going on with such calculations, but the first results look very good.
Important differences between D850 and 5DsR
The site (https://www.digicamdb.com/compare/canon_eos-5ds-r-vs-nikon_d850/Wevbsite) compares both cameras with their technical data. The Nikon is of course a little better off, she is 2 years younger. The viewfinder resolves almost twice as high, even WiFi / Bluetooth is possible But there are other differences that are not marked on this page, but still play a role for me. So the Canon can also be triggered with the small RC-6 handheld trigger via infrared, with Nikon this goes on Snapbridge and the phone, but without a mobile phone I need extra equipment, which makes the matter much more cumbersome. Images can also be transferred directly to the phone, to what extent it makes sense in this amount of data, well, it’s just possible.
A fold-out flash does not have either, but the Nikon’s monitor can be flipped up to 90 ° and it’s a touchmonitor (pity that 180 ° is not in there!).
A final benefit to the D850 is the possibility of using the Nikon DX lenses designed for the 3000, 5000 and 7000 camera series. Image sizes of 5408 × 3600 px are reached, that is 19.5 MP. For many images, this size is quite enough, but it brings the advantage that the lenses are up to a fifth lighter (compared Nikon DX 55-300 equivalent 80-450 KB with 530 grams to the Nikon FX 200-500 with 2300 grams, too the overall length is much smaller at 123 mm compared to 267.5 mm).
Unfortunately, Canon has built its bayonet differently, so that APS-C lenses do not fit here. For this, Canon scores again in the use of foreign lenses by means of adapters, yes there is even an adapter from Novoflex, which adapts Nikon lenses (s.besten only the D series because otherwise the aperture can not be set).
But works on the extra converted Leica R lenses for Nikon, the exposure measurement via live view on the D850; Canon has the 5DsR somehow wrong when using foreign lenses, only after the adjustment of about 5 f-stops is something to see in the display, which of course makes sense by changing the exposure time easier. Sure, with both cameras, foreign lenses can only be used manually.
But one last advantage, the Canon still has: In the viewfinder, I can fade in the horizontal and vertical, so that here a perfect alignment (especially with panoramic shots) is easily possible. At Nikon, this is only on live view on the monitor and is therefore – I think – solved much more cumbersome, but could perhaps be improved by a new firmware.
Furthermore, the D850 with 4K film, the 5DsR only with HD 1920.
Noteworthy is the continuous shooting speed, Nikon brings it to 7 frames / s, when using the battery grip even 9 B / s, but is at 19 frames RAW final (in tracking AF, there are only 15). Canon is there with 5 B / s clearly under it, although here is at 14 pictures RAW almost over, but it goes in contrast to the Nikon slowly on. With JPG both cameras reach higher values (up to 500 pictures), but who already photographs JPG with them?
Canon still has a bit of catching up to do with the lenses that do justice to these high-resolution cameras (despite a two-year advantage), but it should do that. At Nikon, only the latest bright models are recommended.
If you think a 24-MP camera would solve many of the above problems, you’re wrong. Although the whole thing is reduced a bit, but even here we have sensor pixel widths of about 6 microns, only at 12 MP, about 8 microns are achieved. Actually, the problems always remain the same, because these are physically conditioned, they are only just as pronounced in a 12-MP image as in a 24- or 50-MP image.
For those who need to take photos in bad weather, many manufacturers offer suitable cameras, e.g. Sony the Alpha 7S, which only offers 12 MP (now we know why).
Finally, the question remains, who needs such cameras?
Everyone has to answer for themselves. Such high-resolution cameras absolutely need up-to-date and equally high-resolution lenses, but the problem already has many cameras with only 20 or 24 MP, in German: nothing new. Especially in the edge area easier CA (chromatic aberrations) are noticeable, the vignetting (but these problems have all full-format cameras) is not to be despised at large apertures. And as already tested by me and others, higher ISO values than 3200 are no longer optimally feasible. Very good is the respectively missing low pass filter on both models, so the 5DsR is preferable to the 5Ds.
Of course, these cars are not a fast “always-on” camera, they are also heavy (but a D300 or 5D Mk II was not that easy either) and require good and heavier lenses, because they are usually bright and thus a lot Glass has to be carried around.
If you do not need the last bit of sharpness, the 24-MP cameras or the precursors of our two models are quite an acceptable solution. sold the D800 in the net at great prices, after all, this still has 36 MP …
Then comes the lens question. Many think that, and many test reports say that high-resolution cameras also require high-resolution lenses. It’s clear, but considering the “mistakes” that can and do arise from motion, camera shake, ISO, or focus, I do not see it that close. Lenses that have produced good results with the 24-MP full-frame cameras are for the most part also usable here.
What fascinates me so much about the high-resolution cameras is the possibility of being able to produce excerpts from crooked pictures (if things had to be fast), even details can be easily retrieved, for example with the 24-MP pixelation. And even a tripod has quickly said goodbye to the vertical by a careless movement, no problem with the post-processing (no one notices). On Zooms (with all its disadvantages, for example, the pumps and the ability to get dust in the sensor box), I can largely do without in the normal range, from a shot with the 35er image can easily realize a 50s cut (or from a 50s 85 picture).
But everyone has a different opinion!
So … decide for yourself!