What body for automotive use?

[SeizedMedia]

Hello everyone,

I'm new to the forum and basically joined to get some advice to this question but will be an active member. Just a quick bit of knowledge that may help me get the right advice.

I've been shooting for years now and I shoot with 2 Canon 5D MKii's with mostly Canon L glass lenses. I mainly focus on automotive photography and my question is what body would you suggest for automotive use?

I shoot a lot of stationary cars but I occasionally shoot rolling shots (I follow or lead a car that is in motion). The reason I add this info in is because I think that may take the high resolution bodies out of the equation due to the nature of them being very susceptible to very noticeable camera shake. Although, I would like a very high resolution sensor because zooming in while editing would be much easier to pick up sharp edges and for overall printable size and quality.

The 5DS and 5DSR are still possibly good bodies for me but I'm not sure even which I'd go with between those two as the low pass cancellation filter would make for sharper images but I'm afraid the grilles and other fine details of cars may become filled with moire. Maybe it's not a fine enough pattern, maybe it is? Also, would the low frame rate be an issue for me? That's really just a question for me to test out myself I suppose. I would consider a 1Dx or 1Dx MKii but the not so big jump in resolution makes it seem like I'd be better off sticking with what I have now and I'm not shooting sports so I don't need a super high frame rate, just middle ground I'd say.

I also shoot weddings occasionally which throws a wrench in the mix. I can even get two different bodies if that'd be my best option but I would need to be able to use both on a wedding shoot.

I know this is a lot of info to sift through but I really hope I can get some knowledgeable answers!

Thanks,

Ryan

[RobertTheFat]

You've mentioned almost everything but the most obvious candidate: the 5D Mark IV. Is there some reason you're not considering it? Another possibility is the 7D Mark II. It's thought to be one of the best at picking up moving objects, and its smaller sensor increases the telephoto effect by about enough to offset the 5D4's greater resolution.

Also, I suspect that the 5D4 is a favorite of today's wedding photographers, if that matters to you.

[TCampbell]

What do you do with your images once you have them?

Do they get shared online?

Do they get printed?

If they are printed, how large are the prints?

These are the types of questions I’d ask when considering an ultra high resolution camera such as a 5Ds or 5Dsr.  Even a 5D IV exceeds the resolution of most high end monitors (I have a 27” 5k display and it more than fill it).  If you are making large prints (gallery art) then this is a good use of the 5Ds & 5Dsr.  If you’re sharing images online, then the images (unless heavily cropped) have to be resampled to a lower resolution anyway.

The 5Ds & 5Dsr don’t have the ISO and dynamic range of the 5D IV... but the 5Ds/sr are typically used in situations where you control the lighting (no need to shoot at elevated ISOs), often on a tripod, and usually not the sort of photography that has to be done in a hurry.  (Fine art, studio photography, product photography, etc.).  You don’t have to worry about high ISO, noise, and reduction of dynamic range when you can control the lighting, use a tripod, take longer exposures, or even take bracketed exposures to feed into software.

The 5Dsr, where the low-pass filter is removed, tends to do better when shooting natural subjects (landscapes) which tend to not have structured patterns (particularly patterns based on parallel lines and grids) such as brick walls, some fabrics in fashion photography, etc.    The anti-aliasing from the low-pass filter is subtle... but enough to deal with the moiré.  You’ve certainly seen plenty of examples of fine detailed photographs taken with cameras that do use low-pass filters (I wouldn’t worry too much about the filter.)

From what I can infer from your query, I’m thinking a 5D IV is possibly more suited to your needs.

The 1DX and 1DX II excel at sports/action photography.  The sensor resolution is reduced and additional processors and large buffer sizes are used to let the camera easily power through very fast burst sequences with ease.  They are not *particularly* high resolution sensor cameras (although they aren’t low resolution cameras either).

If I were doing fine-art gallery photography (huge prints) then I’d steer toward the 5Ds/sr.

If I were doing a lot of action/sports type shooting then I’d steer toward the 1DX II.

If I needed a bit of both then I’d steer toward the 5D IV.

[SeizedMedia]

I should've explained more about what I meant by "zooming in" in post processing. I didn't mean cropping I just meant zooming in to get a tighter view to brush a specific area. I don't crop photos unless absolutely necessary. I definitely can't go back to crop frame as I need to light capture of full frame and I like to take advantage of my lenses. And actually the 5D mark IV has actually been my top pick so you really just confirmed what I was thinking. I won't be making huge prints. I'd say the largest would be around 36" on the long side.
Thanks guys

[ebiggs1]

"I'd say the largest would be around 36" on the long side."

36" is pretty big. You need to cosider how much of your work is that size. I am definitely in the 5D Mk IV camp.

[TTMartin]

---

@SeizedMedia wrote:
I should've explained more about what I meant by "zooming in" in post processing. I didn't mean cropping I just meant zooming in to get a tighter view to brush a specific area. I don't crop photos unless absolutely necessary. I definitely can't go back to crop frame as I need to light capture of full frame and I like to take advantage of my lenses. And actually the 5D mark IV has actually been my top pick so you really just confirmed what I was thinking. I won't be making huge prints. I'd say the largest would be around 36" on the long side.
Thanks guys

---

I would think the 6D Mk II would be ideal for your work. The tilt-swivel LCD would be great for unusual angles on cars, instead of having to lay down or bend over awkwardly to take shots from taillight level, just use the LCD. It is a big up grade from the 5D MK II, on par with the 5D Mk III, but, with more megapixel, tiltswivel LCD, and some other features. The 6D Mk II is more than capable as a wedding camera. 

[coachboz68]

Hi, Ryan.

I've got a tiny fraction of the photography wisdom of many on this forum, but I'll just share a few of my personal expereinces with you. 

I owned the 7D for years and really loved it for all the reasons everyone talks about.  My primary use case is sports shooting, usually in terrible light (gymnastics), and so I invested in the nicer lenses.  While I loved my 7D, I decided to take the plunge after nearly 10 years and upgrade to the 1DXII.  Along the way in the decision process, the thing that bugged me the most was the "average" resolution of 20MP.  Even though sports is my main thing, I have this weird personal obsession with pin-sharp, super detailed photography.  I wish I had a good reason for it (like, my job depended on my producting huge prints!) but I don't.  It's just a personal thing.  And I was always frustrated that the 7D just didn't have that kind of crazy resolution. 

Well, after a lot of reading, I realized that much (not all) of my problem was me.  When I started taking some portraits of my kids on tripods, with proper exposures, I found such a big difference.  so now I have the 1DXII and and the 70-200 mark II and ... wow.  I simply could not be happier with the sharpness I'm getting when I want a really sharp portrait or landscape and, of course, I do it right.  

In comparison, I was on a trip recently with my colleague who has the 5DS.  He's a way better photographer than me, and landscape is his main thing.  He was telling me that he really only uses the 5DS for specific landscape shooting where he's going to do large prints.  Otherwise, in his words, "the resolution can actually be your enemy when doing normal shooting."  He carries 5DM3 for his regular stuff, and loves it.  

The only reason I went with the 1DXII was for the fps (which is intoxicating!) and as a bonus, because my 7D was so old, I was stunned by how good the low-light capabilities on the 1DXII were in comparison.  Even at 20MP, the full-frame sensor is pretty dang good when it comes to quality, as far as I can tell.  In your case, without the need for the truly high fps, I would not recommend the IDXII.  I'd instead look at the 7D2 or the 5D4.  My friend just got the latter, and it's really fantastic. 

Again, take this for the inexperienced "advice" that it is... which is really just sharing my personal experiences as a hobbyist. 

Billy  

[ebiggs1]

"I realized that much (not all) of my problem was me."

This seems to be an issue a lot of folks have.  The problem is admitting it.  Until one does it is impoosible to overcome.  Glad you did and are moving on.

I use the 1Dx and Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Lens, I consider that gear to be the greatest portrait combo ever invented.