MEDISN
Active Member
Finally had a minute to use the new pixel shift feature on the R5. I shot the same static scene with SL2, OM1 and R5 all using pixel shift. A couple of observations.
1. The R5 is relatively quick to combine the shots - the entire process took about 7 seconds.
2. Highlights can cause trouble so if there are important highlights to protect, consider dialing in some negative exposure compensation.
3. Overall balance of noise and sharpening is pretty good for a JPG.
4. The resulting JPG is 24576 x 16384 and 112MB.
5. The camera really does need to be completely still. I used my phone to trip the shutter after 15s delay. I don't see a way to add a delay in camera.
6. Long exposures are limited by R5's 0.5s electronic shutter.
Here is the full view:
Here is the cropped view normalized to the SL2 (180MP) which I feel hides some of the JPG color noise and jagged edges best. Really, anywhere between 100-200MP looks great but I feel the "400MP" is a stretch.
^SL2 on the left, R5 center, OM1 right
The OM1 outputs 80MP files from its 20MP sensor so it was enlarged to approximately same subject size. Normally I use MFT pixel shift at 25-50MP. Likewise SL2 at around 100-150MP. I would probably use the R5 around the same final result.
There is less latitude to work with the JPG obviously so getting exposure right in camera is a must. If I attempt to lift the shadows on the right side of the image, the JPG does not hold up as well as the 14-bit DNG from the SL2.
Not bad by any means but something to be aware of.
I tried some shots outdoors but with the breeze they were unusable - jaggies everywhere there is slight motion. The Panasonic and Leica cameras with pixel shift have a motion compensation option which does a pretty good job of freezing motion but not without risk of strange artifacts left behind. Olympus cameras leave a slight blur behind with some jaggies on high contrast edges.
Ultimately, I am thrilled to see more manufacturers offering computational features like this, especially straight out of camera.
1. The R5 is relatively quick to combine the shots - the entire process took about 7 seconds.
2. Highlights can cause trouble so if there are important highlights to protect, consider dialing in some negative exposure compensation.
3. Overall balance of noise and sharpening is pretty good for a JPG.
4. The resulting JPG is 24576 x 16384 and 112MB.
5. The camera really does need to be completely still. I used my phone to trip the shutter after 15s delay. I don't see a way to add a delay in camera.
6. Long exposures are limited by R5's 0.5s electronic shutter.
Here is the full view:
Here is the cropped view normalized to the SL2 (180MP) which I feel hides some of the JPG color noise and jagged edges best. Really, anywhere between 100-200MP looks great but I feel the "400MP" is a stretch.
^SL2 on the left, R5 center, OM1 right
The OM1 outputs 80MP files from its 20MP sensor so it was enlarged to approximately same subject size. Normally I use MFT pixel shift at 25-50MP. Likewise SL2 at around 100-150MP. I would probably use the R5 around the same final result.
There is less latitude to work with the JPG obviously so getting exposure right in camera is a must. If I attempt to lift the shadows on the right side of the image, the JPG does not hold up as well as the 14-bit DNG from the SL2.
Not bad by any means but something to be aware of.
I tried some shots outdoors but with the breeze they were unusable - jaggies everywhere there is slight motion. The Panasonic and Leica cameras with pixel shift have a motion compensation option which does a pretty good job of freezing motion but not without risk of strange artifacts left behind. Olympus cameras leave a slight blur behind with some jaggies on high contrast edges.
Ultimately, I am thrilled to see more manufacturers offering computational features like this, especially straight out of camera.
) is the lack of high quality, compact options. All the great lenses are large and expensive.