I'm loving the direction which this is going in.. it's early days, but I'd be up for a more robust version of this in future updates for product photography and interiors. As it stands I don't think I can justify upgrading to a new version of the R5 so any added value they can bring to the MKI is win in my book.
Panasonic has a pretty awesome pixel shift feature. It requires a tripod, but does a good job of making motion look like motion blur, and you get a single Raw file that you can open in LR and edit as normal.
I’m responding here because I use a Lumix G9. The Panasonic version of pixel shift works, but you need to know a few things. First, camera support needs to be rock solid. Stepping up tripod upper leg diameter until I couldn’t notice a difference, I wound up using a tripod with 36mm diameter upper legs - seems like overkill for Micro 4/3rds, but there you have it. Second, the camera’s own calibration of where the sensor is needs some work. Once I got the camera set up and settled down, I took two high res images. The second one was always better. Panasonic would never admit this, but when the camera moves so does the sensor. High res mode needs a calibration step… Lastly there is the lens. This is no different than any other high res sensor showing the limits of the lens, but with 80MP from that tiny sensor it’s pushing the limits of any lens.
I really think that you should give Canon a better shot at the Ibis high resolution. You’re always going back to Sony picture where there’s a car in the frame but the car is on a straight road and has its brake lights on so it is most likely not even moving. It also appears that the car and the mountains in the background are anywhere from a 1/4 - 1 mile away from the camera. Why don’t you take pictures with the canon R5 of objects in the distance that would be similar. It also says that nine different photos are taken and then merged together. That’s going to take at least a 1/4 of a second as long as your shutter is fast enough so of course you’re going to have some movement on objects. Otherwise it would be an AI image.
I think some people look at pixel shift the same way that some look at video in a stills camera. It may not be for everyone but the ones who need it and know how to use will get the benefit from it. I wonder if the z8 will have it.
Thanks for checking this out. I updated to 1.8.1 yesterday and will give it a go. How about a video telling us the best practices to get the best of of pixel shift (Canon's)?
I'm a Canon fan and dedicated R5 user, but even I'm baffled by why they would release this rather than some of the things everyone has been asking for (remove 30 minute record limit - Simon) or the same subject and eye tracking menu choices (much more logical) that exist on the R6 Mk II, which I also now own. As others have said, I too will never use this "advanced" feature.
I would sooner this be kept for the R5 II and do a better job of it and gives us things like focus breathing compensation and pre buffer shooting ;) And yeah, the 30 minute limit too ;)
@@OrdinaryFilmmaker I think the feedback from discussions just like this is how they may prepare the technology for the Mk II R5. I don't see anything wrong with holding off on certain releases until they have the feature ready and without bricking users cameras or causing a revolt because they haven't managed an implementation that works with the current hardware yet.
I shoot original art (paintings, watercolors, etc.) for creating facsimiles for artists. I gave up on Canon creating a pixel shift camera so I bought a Fujifilm GFX 50s II. I have lots of Canon lenses that I can use on the Fuji. Now that Canon has added pixel shift, I will give the R5 a try. For those who shoot stationary products, pixel shift is a necessity!
Pixel shift does have potential for certain specialists like macro, product, still life, or architecture. Basically, stuff with absolutely no motion. Landscape shooters like me? Nah; too many little moving things like leaves, grass, water, etc. But pros will really want the camera to render RAW files if at all possible. Any idea if pixel shift RAW files will be possible with another firmware update?
Being a landscape photographer I am with you on this. If Any movement is going to trip up IBIS I will continue as I am now shooting panoramic image to get the hi resolution and I get them in RAW.
In my opinion, I think the Gh6 has the best pixel shift in any camera. You can do it handheld, get a 100mp file, it corrects movement aswell. Olympus has been doing handheld pixel shift for a while now but it was only 50mp and it didn't correct movement very well
I have to question your comparison with the photo from Sony and yours from Canon, the moving object in the Sony pic is obviously a long way from the camera, show me an example from Sony when the moving object is only a few feet away, or the one fom Canon is 1/2 a mile away. Not that I care one way or another as I'm probably never going to use it, also you can reduce noise by stacking multiple same images.
Sony handles moving objects by detecting the movement and then using the pixels from only a single image to replace the moving object. So the "frozen" object is rendered at the resolution of a single, non-pixel shifted image. You can do the same thing with Canons pixel shift if you overlay a non-pixel shifted image of the scene and then mask out the blurred objects to reveal the frozen ones. Also, Canon renders the final image in-camera so you can view it on the back screen. Sony requires you to download all of the component images to their software and generate the final image on you computer.
I've done some experimentation with IBIS hi-res, and like it. You have to take great care though. If you are at all sloppy in your approach, you will get sloppy results. Another item in the list of ingredients for good results is a top-quality lens. IBIS hi-res is utterly merciless when it comes to demonstrating the shortcomings of your glass. I haven't tested many lenses yet, but so far, have only got really good results with a native RF prime (85mm f/1.2). The EF L-series lenses I tested were markedly inferior.
That is a nice tripod but the wrong type for pixel shift exposures And there is a lot of fine tuning of the actual shutter speed used. Certain ranges of shutter speeds can not be used. Finally on what the tripod legs rest upon will influence the final results. It is great that these manufactures are offering this feature but going from 14-bit to true 16-bit capture would show a greater improvement. Thank you for bringing this new information to our attention.
One thing that I have been thinking from the very beginning: the Sony A7RV combines sixteen 61mp images to get a 240mp image, meaning that it "stacks" images by a factor of 4, whereas on the other hand, the Canon R5 does not do stacking whatsoever. In the end it really depends on whether the user prefers higher resolution (Canon R5) or less noise (A7R5) I've been doing pixel shift with my A7R3. Although its 4-image pixel shift does not increase resolution, by stacking 4 images, it does exhibit a significant boost in image quality
True, I get that. I'd like to see that too on a five series camera, but the anger over 1.8.1 wasn't warranted. Pixel Shift is pretty decent - just limited in its roll. I think Sony has a better implementation, especially for moving objects.
I just tried ibis I resolution on my R5, shot a stationary subject with the Really Right Stuff tripod. Pixel peeping my standard image was far better and using the new feature it only produce JPEG’s, so they cannot be edited as well. The feature has a maximum shutter speed of .5 of a second and recommend raising shutter speed highest you can get away with to reduce blur because his future cannot handle movement😢
I'll see how good it is with moving trees and grass when I have them out, but for now, food and product shoots are good enough. Just light things up properly ;)
As a Macro Photographer I think this will be a great feature but I will see as with focus stacking the subject needs to be still and not all my subject like to sat still LOL so A lot are taken with High ISO and a fast shutter speed even in a sunny day the RF 100 macro at F8 to try and get some depth in the image dont leave a lot of time some times. I will have a play and see but like you said its FREE and its also an ADDISION so a Win Win even if you dont use it
The fact that the R5 is 2 1/2 years older than the A7R5 and is receiving free updates like this can only be a good thing. Can't understand anybody who complains at free extra features. If you don't, can't or will not use it then nothing has changed for you :)
They can't be serious. Only JPG files and and when you zoom in it is grossly pixellated. Compare that with the Leica SL2 and GFX 100s - where the files are clean and in DNG - they look great in Hi ISO as well.
You can see the ground?! lol Gonna be awhile to melt the 3' of snow in my yard 🙃 Thanks for the brief review. I'm looking forward to trying this myself. May give it a try on some higher end Real Estate Photography.
Good presentation! When I updated the firmware and 1st tried pixel shift on my R5 I found out it won't work for me shooting without a tripod. And if shooting outside even with a tripod any wind will be an issue too. My initial thoughts were pixel shift on the R5 is pretty much a gimmick. After your video I'm looking to revisit pixel shift and see if under certain circumstances it could be useful. Have you experimented pixel shift with a macro lens? That might be a very interesting thing to check out.
I won't be likely to use Pixel shift current version. I am hoping for improved AF system in a future update. Saving for an R5II or if I win lottery an R1.
Agreed. This is ripe for a 2.0. Sony has the best pixel shift. Canon needs to be able to take into account moving objects. I suspect grass and leaves will be far more challenging for landscapes.
I’m just trying to think of the use case where 400 mp is solving a problem and jpeg files are just fine. I thought that many cases of product photography accurate color was very important. Wouldn’t the smaller color space of sRGB in jpeg be problematic?
It's 1 step forward in resolution and 2 steps back in colour and dynamic range. You would be better off shooting raw, then using something like Enhance in Adobe Camera Raw to upscale the resolution (though I can't figure out where anything more than 45 MP would be needed).
Great video, useful information. I wonder, how pixel shift with the R5 comes out for street photography! Because, in this genre movement blur is often desired.
First, a pro camera feature for a professional photographer? Yes. 403MP is on the mid-to-lower end of the images I build using pano stitching that end up as 96" wide acrylic prints ($$$$). 403MP for weekend warriors shooting ducks? Simply don't use the feature. With new AI tech, pixel shift is going to be insane. Most of the shot will be static but for dynamic elements, a routine will identify and replace them with AI upscaled elements from one or more shots where the elements are static. Blend those together and you get the best of both worlds.
Hi Simon, thanks for shining a light on what this feature IS able to do (looking beyond what we'd been hoping for fw 2.0) Can you enlighten the "requirement" to use either EOS utility or DPP ? Is the merge only happing on the computer ?? If not, then I don't get why we can't use a card reader and directly open it in the likes of Adobe, DxO, etc ..
You can use a card reader, and display or edit the JPEG on any operating system of your choice, with whatever tools you want. I've done this. The "requirement" to use Canon utilities is nonsense. The output is just an ordinary (but large) JPEG.
If possible, I’d really appreciate after researching this feature you can make it tutorial for us👍 Canon recommends using their software, but really have no information and I used Lightroom. I was very disappointed when zooming in and the fact the only output was a JPEG
Someone should tell Canon that both photoshop AND lightroom has image enlarger built in (and it's raw too). I shoot product (toy) photography, tried pixel shift last night. It was useful in making clean, super precise photoshop masks, BUT, there was a part of image overexposed that I couldn't recover because it was JPEG. It was my first toy photo that was actually ruined and I refused to share on insta. I also do landscape and often you need to take multiple exposures and even more often you need to focus stack. I can only imagine the hell trying to focus stack 4-5 photos. I bet 9 outta 10 pro landscape photographers would never use it either... SO WHO IS THIS FOR!?!?!? not for me, that's for damn sure. lol
True and Topaz had it to but image enlarger is not the same as the benefit of detail capturing on another level. Enlarging a pixel shift image versus standard image enlaged would yield two different images where the pixel shift is clearly more defined and detailed
So this would have been great in my commercial/product days from which I am retired. Then I panorama stitched if needed. As questioned back at the rumor stage, what about tracked & guided astrophotos. I'm thinking nope w the canon, but how about Sony. Please share your thoughts. Thanks for the info and comparison.
Ok so everything you show that Sony image we see that tiny little car in the corner from a distance! For sure that’s a factor it’s not taking up a lot of pixel real estate either THINK about it 😅 ❤
Product photography typically use flash , will it work , or I assume one would need continuous light .The question is how is exposure handled in pixel shift
The only thing that matters to me is that Canon releases a FW that frees us from the 30 minute limit on this camera. Nothing more, nothing less. That's why I didn't even install FW 1.8.1.
A feature in search of a use. You can use software for the same purpose. I know Photography is being taken over by Geeks but the feature Race is getting ridiculous. Most aren’t making large prints today.
Could other lower-end models also perform pixel-shift if they use IBIS? It seems to me they should be able to (R6ii, R7, R10). Am I correct in my thinking, or is there more to it?
You don't need to use Canon's software. The jagged or noisy result is because the camera isn't stable during the shoot. It means that the tripod isn't sturdy enough, you are walking near the camera when the pics are being taken or you are manually pressing the shutter. Try inside first to eliminate any issues due to wind. Pixel Shift requires a very stable platform free from any vibration.
It is totally a gimmick for most people. I doubt many will bother to use it once they see the size of the files and realize they have zero use for it. Tbh all I want from Canon at this point is just a native cropped panorama aspect ratio (say 21:9 like Sigma cameras have), AWB lock for video and DR 400% (like Fujifilm cameras have), and a fix to that annoying bug that makes image format default to JPG after you've used HDR for a pic, instead of going back to the JPG+RAW option you had actively selected before. Simple things to easily squeeze into a firmware update that would actually make a difference when taking photos or videos.
400MP without RAW files is not useful. even for studio applications, would you use JPG without the means of editing dark and highlights? More like marketing to me
I still don't understand where 400 MP (or 200 MP) can be used? I've printed 8 MP 1D2N files on billboards and adverts on the side of transit buses and they look ridiculously good.
From a distance yes, but for use cases when viewing from up close this is where this technology can work. I suggest checking in with those that use it a lot. For me, its not something I need.
I'm talking a look at this from a nine-year olds perspective and see what I can get out of it. When I do reviews, I can see this being a great way to zoom in when needed. But I don't think it is there for landscapes yet.
If you ever need a lot of detail - shooting products and food, then it is a good thing. For landscapes - I'm not 100% as it depends on the movement in the frame ;)
There's a certain - dare I mention him - Ken Rockwell, who only shoots JPEG, because he doesn't have time to mess with RAW. I'm of the same persuasion, but for different reasons.
Only useful in limited ways. No Raw file for editing is a huge negative. Event and sports type activities will have no use for this as it stands now. I have no plans on using this feature.
This all seems so gimmicky to me. Where does it stop. I have never in my life found myself looking for a magnifying glass to look for cracks in pebbles the size of peas, in let's say, a glossy magazine or even in poster size prints.
Pixel shift will slow down and limit your photography so significantly that you will grow sick of it fast. Outside of archival photography or someone is specifically commissioning you to print a work at some insane size with a high PPI you probably won't use it.
Tom, the only use cases I can see to be effective are food and product photography, but we need to see raw as an option. Without Raw, we can light things up well enough, but this is in need of a version 2 ;)
@@OrdinaryFilmmaker Even in those situations I can't imagine the need. I've done product photography. Nobody cares if they can see the details of a grain of sand in a product image, they just want to see what you're selling.
Pixel shift as Canon does it sounds useless, based on your experience. Also, I put a glass of water in the middle of my kitchen island in a high-wind day and noticed the water moving. Unless most studios are made of solid concrete and none are located above metro trains or are near traffic, they won’t be any more solid than my townhouse.
![ARGENTINA vs. CHILE [3-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 7](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/De3AWmXzhuA/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm loving the direction which this is going in.. it's early days, but I'd be up for a more robust version of this in future updates for product photography and interiors. As it stands I don't think I can justify upgrading to a new version of the R5 so any added value they can bring to the MKI is win in my book.
Panasonic has a pretty awesome pixel shift feature. It requires a tripod, but does a good job of making motion look like motion blur, and you get a single Raw file that you can open in LR and edit as normal.
Panasonic does a lot of things well, but they need to work on objects in motion - they still produce a lot of artefacts.
I’m responding here because I use a Lumix G9. The Panasonic version of pixel shift works, but you need to know a few things. First, camera support needs to be rock solid. Stepping up tripod upper leg diameter until I couldn’t notice a difference, I wound up using a tripod with 36mm diameter upper legs - seems like overkill for Micro 4/3rds, but there you have it. Second, the camera’s own calibration of where the sensor is needs some work. Once I got the camera set up and settled down, I took two high res images. The second one was always better. Panasonic would never admit this, but when the camera moves so does the sensor. High res mode needs a calibration step… Lastly there is the lens. This is no different than any other high res sensor showing the limits of the lens, but with 80MP from that tiny sensor it’s pushing the limits of any lens.
I really think that you should give Canon a better shot at the Ibis high resolution. You’re always going back to Sony picture where there’s a car in the frame but the car is on a straight road and has its brake lights on so it is most likely not even moving. It also appears that the car and the mountains in the background are anywhere from a 1/4 - 1 mile away from the camera. Why don’t you take pictures with the canon R5 of objects in the distance that would be similar. It also says that nine different photos are taken and then merged together. That’s going to take at least a 1/4 of a second as long as your shutter is fast enough so of course you’re going to have some movement on objects. Otherwise it would be an AI image.
your reviews and news of cameras and equipment and other updates are one of the few channels i trust to provide accurate information. great job!
I appreciate that. I'm working hard to improve each video I put out.
I think some people look at pixel shift the same way that some look at video in a stills camera. It may not be for everyone but the ones who need it and know how to use will get the benefit from it. I wonder if the z8 will have it.
Thanks for checking this out. I updated to 1.8.1 yesterday and will give it a go. How about a video telling us the best practices to get the best of of pixel shift (Canon's)?
I'm a Canon fan and dedicated R5 user, but even I'm baffled by why they would release this rather than some of the things everyone has been asking for (remove 30 minute record limit - Simon) or the same subject and eye tracking menu choices (much more logical) that exist on the R6 Mk II, which I also now own. As others have said, I too will never use this "advanced" feature.
I would sooner this be kept for the R5 II and do a better job of it and gives us things like focus breathing compensation and pre buffer shooting ;) And yeah, the 30 minute limit too ;)
@@OrdinaryFilmmaker I think the feedback from discussions just like this is how they may prepare the technology for the Mk II R5. I don't see anything wrong with holding off on certain releases until they have the feature ready and without bricking users cameras or causing a revolt because they haven't managed an implementation that works with the current hardware yet.
I miss the good old days, just go out and shoot, no drama.
There is no Drama. Its only on social Media.
Yes.. one can chose to follow the drama or ignore it. It is quite easy.
I shoot original art (paintings, watercolors, etc.) for creating facsimiles for artists. I gave up on Canon creating a pixel shift camera so I bought a Fujifilm GFX 50s II.
I have lots of Canon lenses that I can use on the Fuji. Now that Canon has added pixel shift, I will give the R5 a try. For those who shoot stationary products, pixel shift
is a necessity!
Pixel shift does have potential for certain specialists like macro, product, still life, or architecture. Basically, stuff with absolutely no motion. Landscape shooters like me? Nah; too many little moving things like leaves, grass, water, etc. But pros will really want the camera to render RAW files if at all possible. Any idea if pixel shift RAW files will be possible with another firmware update?
Being a landscape photographer I am with you on this.
If Any movement is going to trip up IBIS I will continue as I am now shooting panoramic image to get the hi resolution and I get them in RAW.
In my opinion, I think the Gh6 has the best pixel shift in any camera. You can do it handheld, get a 100mp file, it corrects movement aswell. Olympus has been doing handheld pixel shift for a while now but it was only 50mp and it didn't correct movement very well
Handheld is impressive.
Panasonic had better pixel shift than Sony a7Riv. With the a7Rv Sony have the best.
Pixel shift with only 8 bit jpeg is a cheap solution.
I have to question your comparison with the photo from Sony and yours from Canon, the moving object in the Sony pic is obviously a long way from the camera, show me an example from Sony when the moving object is only a few feet away, or the one fom Canon is 1/2 a mile away. Not that I care one way or another as I'm probably never going to use it, also you can reduce noise by stacking multiple same images.
Sony handles moving objects by detecting the movement and then using the pixels from only a single image to replace the moving object. So the "frozen" object is rendered at the resolution of a single, non-pixel shifted image. You can do the same thing with Canons pixel shift if you overlay a non-pixel shifted image of the scene and then mask out the blurred objects to reveal the frozen ones. Also, Canon renders the final image in-camera so you can view it on the back screen. Sony requires you to download all of the component images to their software and generate the final image on you computer.
I've done some experimentation with IBIS hi-res, and like it. You have to take great care though. If you are at all sloppy in your approach, you will get sloppy results.
Another item in the list of ingredients for good results is a top-quality lens. IBIS hi-res is utterly merciless when it comes to demonstrating the shortcomings of your glass. I haven't tested many lenses yet, but so far, have only got really good results with a native RF prime (85mm f/1.2). The EF L-series lenses I tested were markedly inferior.
Yes, a top quality lens makes a difference. I failed to mention I had the RF 50 f/1.2
That is a nice tripod but the wrong type for pixel shift exposures
And there is a lot of fine tuning of the actual shutter speed used.
Certain ranges of shutter speeds can not be used. Finally on what
the tripod legs rest upon will influence the final results. It is great that
these manufactures are offering this feature but going from 14-bit
to true 16-bit capture would show a greater improvement.
Thank you for bringing this new information to our attention.
I bought the tripod for my video work, not for Pixel Shift ;) As I'm sure you know, its meant for video. I don't have a single photo spec tripod.
Thank you Ordinary Filmmaker. :)
Our pleasure.
One thing that I have been thinking from the very beginning: the Sony A7RV combines sixteen 61mp images to get a 240mp image, meaning that it "stacks" images by a factor of 4, whereas on the other hand, the Canon R5 does not do stacking whatsoever. In the end it really depends on whether the user prefers higher resolution (Canon R5) or less noise (A7R5)
I've been doing pixel shift with my A7R3. Although its 4-image pixel shift does not increase resolution, by stacking 4 images, it does exhibit a significant boost in image quality
You're forgetting that the a7 R5 can also deal with moving objects where the R5 cannot ;)
@@OrdinaryFilmmaker True, but as appealing as it is, the A7R3 is still going to stay with me for quite a while :D
Pixel shift is fine and all, but I really want the RAW-file(s) for it and of course less artifacts. No way I replace my RAW's with JPEG's.
True, I get that. I'd like to see that too on a five series camera, but the anger over 1.8.1 wasn't warranted. Pixel Shift is pretty decent - just limited in its roll. I think Sony has a better implementation, especially for moving objects.
I agree. I'm even fine with static objects being that I'd mostly want to use it for landscapes. But the JPG only option kills it for me.
I just tried ibis I resolution on my R5, shot a stationary subject with the Really Right Stuff tripod. Pixel peeping my standard image was far better and using the new feature it only produce JPEG’s, so they cannot be edited as well. The feature has a maximum shutter speed of .5 of a second and recommend raising shutter speed highest you can get away with to reduce blur because his future cannot handle movement😢
Thanks for the review. Convinces me to wait. I had hoped for A7R like ability to deal with moving reeds or trees. Sounds like that is later.
I'll see how good it is with moving trees and grass when I have them out, but for now, food and product shoots are good enough. Just light things up properly ;)
As a Macro Photographer I think this will be a great feature but I will see as with focus stacking the subject needs to be still and not all my subject like to sat still LOL so A lot are taken with High ISO and a fast shutter speed even in a sunny day the RF 100 macro at F8 to try and get some depth in the image dont leave a lot of time some times.
I will have a play and see but like you said its FREE and its also an ADDISION so a Win Win even if you dont use it
That's why I shot. brick wall and fence - they stay relatively static ;)
The fact that the R5 is 2 1/2 years older than the A7R5 and is receiving free updates like this can only be a good thing. Can't understand anybody who complains at free extra features. If you don't, can't or will not use it then nothing has changed for you :)
I tend to agree.
Panasonic has a great pixel shift. Also their ibis seems very effective for video.
Thanks man. This is very helpful
I liked that image you took of the person walking the dog.
Thanks Alex.
They can't be serious. Only JPG files and and when you zoom in it is grossly pixellated. Compare that with the Leica SL2 and GFX 100s - where the files are clean and in DNG - they look great in Hi ISO as well.
You can see the ground?! lol Gonna be awhile to melt the 3' of snow in my yard 🙃
Thanks for the brief review. I'm looking forward to trying this myself. May give it a try on some higher end Real Estate Photography.
Just last week we still have 8 inches on the ground. So happy to see some green but want more colour Jonathan ;)
Good presentation! When I updated the firmware and 1st tried pixel shift on my R5 I found out it won't work for me shooting without a tripod. And if shooting outside even with a tripod any wind will be an issue too. My initial thoughts were pixel shift on the R5 is pretty much a gimmick. After your video I'm looking to revisit pixel shift and see if under certain circumstances it could be useful. Have you experimented pixel shift with a macro lens? That might be a very interesting thing to check out.
I won't be likely to use Pixel shift current version. I am hoping for improved AF system in a future update. Saving for an R5II or if I win lottery an R1.
This is great for product or macro of static objects.
Agreed.
It would be interesting to compare pixel shift to Lightroom “super resolution” or Topaz Gigapixel AI”
Good 1st attempt by Canon. Give them some time and Pixel Shift will be super.
Agreed. This is ripe for a 2.0. Sony has the best pixel shift. Canon needs to be able to take into account moving objects. I suspect grass and leaves will be far more challenging for landscapes.
I’m just trying to think of the use case where 400 mp is solving a problem and jpeg files are just fine. I thought that many cases of product photography accurate color was very important. Wouldn’t the smaller color space of sRGB in jpeg be problematic?
It's 1 step forward in resolution and 2 steps back in colour and dynamic range. You would be better off shooting raw, then using something like Enhance in Adobe Camera Raw to upscale the resolution (though I can't figure out where anything more than 45 MP would be needed).
Great video, useful information. I wonder, how pixel shift with the R5 comes out for street photography! Because, in this genre movement blur is often desired.
Thanks Simon for your informative observation.
First, a pro camera feature for a professional photographer? Yes. 403MP is on the mid-to-lower end of the images I build using pano stitching that end up as 96" wide acrylic prints ($$$$). 403MP for weekend warriors shooting ducks? Simply don't use the feature. With new AI tech, pixel shift is going to be insane. Most of the shot will be static but for dynamic elements, a routine will identify and replace them with AI upscaled elements from one or more shots where the elements are static. Blend those together and you get the best of both worlds.
Hi Simon, thanks for shining a light on what this feature IS able to do (looking beyond what we'd been hoping for fw 2.0)
Can you enlighten the "requirement" to use either EOS utility or DPP ? Is the merge only happing on the computer ??
If not, then I don't get why we can't use a card reader and directly open it in the likes of Adobe, DxO, etc ..
You can use a card reader, and display or edit the JPEG on any operating system of your choice, with whatever tools you want. I've done this. The "requirement" to use Canon utilities is nonsense. The output is just an ordinary (but large) JPEG.
@@CrowPal Thank you for this clarification Dave !! Nonsense, except for the fact DPP needs an update to be able handle these large jpegs 😛
After shooting, I took the images directly to Final Cut Pro. I did nothing in DPP or EOS utility.
If possible, I’d really appreciate after researching this feature you can make it tutorial for us👍 Canon recommends using their software, but really have no information and I used Lightroom. I was very disappointed when zooming in and the fact the only output was a JPEG
Has anyone noticed that the SUV in the Sony picture is actually stopped. look at the brake lights.
Someone should tell Canon that both photoshop AND lightroom has image enlarger built in (and it's raw too). I shoot product (toy) photography, tried pixel shift last night. It was useful in making clean, super precise photoshop masks, BUT, there was a part of image overexposed that I couldn't recover because it was JPEG. It was my first toy photo that was actually ruined and I refused to share on insta. I also do landscape and often you need to take multiple exposures and even more often you need to focus stack. I can only imagine the hell trying to focus stack 4-5 photos. I bet 9 outta 10 pro landscape photographers would never use it either... SO WHO IS THIS FOR!?!?!? not for me, that's for damn sure. lol
True and Topaz had it to but image enlarger is not the same as the benefit of detail capturing on another level. Enlarging a pixel shift image versus standard image enlaged would yield two different images where the pixel shift is clearly more defined and detailed
@@arildhagen3820 yea I compared them. You can see a different when zoomed in like 500%. Useless at that point.
informative news Thanks Simon.
Thanks for watching again John!
2:50😅good one😅
So this would have been great in my commercial/product days from which I am retired. Then I panorama stitched if needed. As questioned back at the rumor stage, what about tracked & guided astrophotos. I'm thinking nope w the canon, but how about Sony. Please share your thoughts. Thanks for the info and comparison.
Good info for me. Thx.
Glad it was helpful Scott and thanks for stopping by.
Ok so everything you show that Sony image we see that tiny little car in the corner from a distance! For sure that’s a factor it’s not taking up a lot of pixel real estate either THINK about it 😅 ❤
Product photography typically use flash , will it work , or I assume one would need continuous light .The question is how is exposure handled in pixel shift
The only thing that matters to me is that Canon releases a FW that frees us from the 30 minute limit on this camera. Nothing more, nothing less. That's why I didn't even install FW 1.8.1.
I think I will purchase one for just the 400MP photos. Can you bracket the exposure in the Pixle shift mode?
A feature in search of a use. You can use software for the same purpose. I know Photography is being taken over by Geeks but the feature Race is getting ridiculous. Most aren’t making large prints today.
Could other lower-end models also perform pixel-shift if they use IBIS? It seems to me they should be able to (R6ii, R7, R10). Am I correct in my thinking, or is there more to it?
I think an intetesting.feature like this can be useful for very static subjects.
Am I doing something wrong? The Pixel shift images I've captured don't look higher res just jagged and noisey. Do I need Canon software to preview?
You don't need to use Canon's software. The jagged or noisy result is because the camera isn't stable during the shoot. It means that the tripod isn't sturdy enough, you are walking near the camera when the pics are being taken or you are manually pressing the shutter. Try inside first to eliminate any issues due to wind.
Pixel Shift requires a very stable platform free from any vibration.
It would be cool if they add eye controlled AF later
I think that requires a hardware upgrade.
It is totally a gimmick for most people. I doubt many will bother to use it once they see the size of the files and realize they have zero use for it. Tbh all I want from Canon at this point is just a native cropped panorama aspect ratio (say 21:9 like Sigma cameras have), AWB lock for video and DR 400% (like Fujifilm cameras have), and a fix to that annoying bug that makes image format default to JPG after you've used HDR for a pic, instead of going back to the JPG+RAW option you had actively selected before. Simple things to easily squeeze into a firmware update that would actually make a difference when taking photos or videos.
I have no use for it for the wildlife, rodeos and concerts I do. They need to work one an even better Eye AF tracking.
400MP without RAW files is not useful. even for studio applications, would you use JPG without the means of editing dark and highlights? More like marketing to me
I still don't understand where 400 MP (or 200 MP) can be used? I've printed 8 MP 1D2N files on billboards and adverts on the side of transit buses and they look ridiculously good.
From a distance yes, but for use cases when viewing from up close this is where this technology can work. I suggest checking in with those that use it a lot. For me, its not something I need.
I tried it and I really have no idea what’s the point. I don’t think I did anything wrong.
Not useless
Olympus has handheld pixelshift
Does the image stabilizer of the lens have to be ON?
Lord, it’s the first version. The nay-sayers should cool their jets.
I'm talking a look at this from a nine-year olds perspective and see what I can get out of it. When I do reviews, I can see this being a great way to zoom in when needed. But I don't think it is there for landscapes yet.
Just not interested in pixel shift. Ironically, when the next firmware update comes, if I want it, I'll end up with this pixel shift update anyway.
If you ever need a lot of detail - shooting products and food, then it is a good thing. For landscapes - I'm not 100% as it depends on the movement in the frame ;)
I like many others stopped using jpeg years ago.
Not me. I still use them. lot. Always shoot raw and jpeg just in case.
There's a certain - dare I mention him - Ken Rockwell, who only shoots JPEG, because he doesn't have time to mess with RAW. I'm of the same persuasion, but for different reasons.
Only useful in limited ways. No Raw file for editing is a huge negative. Event and sports type activities will have no use for this as it stands now. I have no plans on using this feature.
Definitely a niche. Adding raw and the ability to deal with moving objects would help expand the use, but I find 45 mp images to be detailed enough ;)
This all seems so gimmicky to me. Where does it stop. I have never in my life found myself looking for a magnifying glass to look for cracks in pebbles the size of peas, in let's say, a glossy magazine or even in poster size prints.
Pixel shift will slow down and limit your photography so significantly that you will grow sick of it fast. Outside of archival photography or someone is specifically commissioning you to print a work at some insane size with a high PPI you probably won't use it.
Did you use DPP? Thx
I tried this out... I was less than impressed, personally. I can't think of a single reason I would put this to use on a paid job.
Tom, the only use cases I can see to be effective are food and product photography, but we need to see raw as an option. Without Raw, we can light things up well enough, but this is in need of a version 2 ;)
@@OrdinaryFilmmaker Even in those situations I can't imagine the need. I've done product photography. Nobody cares if they can see the details of a grain of sand in a product image, they just want to see what you're selling.
It's not wholly a gimmick, I can see clear use cases, but it is of limited utility for most photographers.
Pixel shift as Canon does it sounds useless, based on your experience. Also, I put a glass of water in the middle of my kitchen island in a high-wind day and noticed the water moving. Unless most studios are made of solid concrete and none are located above metro trains or are near traffic, they won’t be any more solid than my townhouse.
pixel shift is a boon for reproduction photographers... and the cultural heritage sector....
It doesn't work on mine at all. Even on a tripod. Completely useless.
Did you follow all the steps? What kind of tripod?
What lens?