Canon r5 Low light capabilities

C

chus

Suspended / Banned
Messages
9
Name
Pepe
Edit My Images
No
Hi all, first thread here. And it'll be a simple one. I'm considering buying a Canon R5 (mark i) and I was just wondering how it works for low light photography. In real world... how high you go with ISO before photos become unusable? I love shooting in low light, indoors or late in the evening and a decent performer in those scenarios is a must. I own the R6 and its fantastic on low light but I missed the top LCD and mainly, the magnesium body of Canon 5 series. So, any experience you can share in these kind of shooting scenarios? How the R5 compares to the R6? I know this has been talked about here quite a lot but I could not find precise answers... lots of threads talking about this question but rather on pixel peeping level. So, any help would be appreciated. Thanks
 
Responses may differ significantly from person to person. What is acceptable to some is not to others, and there are different use cases from large prints to 1000px web image.
It is certain to have more noise at pixel level compared to r6, but may get very similar once scaled down to similar size, and especially if using some denoise.

Your best case scenario is to find and download some raw test files from sites like dpreview or use canon test drive offer
 
LongLensPhotography said:
Responses may differ significantly from person to person. What is acceptable to some is not to others, and there are different use cases from large prints to 1000px web image.
It is certain to have more noise at pixel level compared to r6, but may get very similar once scaled down to similar size, and especially if using some denoise.

Your best case scenario is to find and download some raw test files from sites like dpreview or use canon test drive offer
Click to expand...
Sure, it makes sense really. I even like some grain in (some of) my pictures and sometimes tend to, on purpose, underexpose the shots so grain comes up once I push brightness in postproduction. I say this to show what you said is right: approaches to what is pleasant, decent or unacceptable may differ indeed. I should have been more precise, maybe. However, many thanks for your advise. Ill take a look to those sites. Thanks for you reply actually
 
I've photographed nocturnal owl using specialised light. Bird was perched 20feet above the light source. Gone up to 25600 ISO (maybe 51200 can't remember the exact figure) and probably still under exposed by 2 stops. AF does not lock onto bird it's way over -7ev.

PP with noise AI, usable image on increase the exposure slider up to 1 stop before weird colours starts to appear.

Please note this quite extreme condition and you can just about see it with your naked eye.
 
I have shot at maximum ISO on my R5, band photography at very low light , happy with the results
 
robinsslee said:
I've photographed nocturnal owl using specialised light. Bird was perched 20feet above the light source. Gone up to 25600 ISO (maybe 51200 can't remember the exact figure) and probably still under exposed by 2 stops. AF does not lock onto bird it's way over -7ev.

PP with noise AI, usable image on increase the exposure slider up to 1 stop before weird colours starts to appear.

Please note this quite extreme condition and you can just about see it with your naked eye.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the detailed explanation. Thats amazing, really!! Lovely Instagram, by the way. Was the photo of the eagle in Hokkaido (the one with the sun behind) shot with your R5? I dont know how much PP you applied or if you had used few shots but the DR is amazing!
 
chus said:
Thanks for the detailed explanation. Thats amazing, really!! Lovely Instagram, by the way. Was the photo of the eagle in Hokkaido (the one with the sun behind) shot with your R5? I dont know how much PP you applied or if you had used few shots but the DR is amazing!
Click to expand...
Yes it was with R5.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top