I've been a serious "hobby level" photographer most of my life and have hit a speed bump this year with respect to my photos. A few years back I sold my Canon EOS 5D Mk II to upgrade to a Mk III. Prior to the Mk II I had a 40D. With each upgrade came a very obvious upgrade in picture quality. Obviously because of increased megapixels and general improvements in hardware, construction...whatever. Seven months, or so, ago I upgraded the Mk III to the 5DS R, one of their top of the line models at the time.
I was jumping from 22.3 mp to 50.2 mp......Holy moley I was ready to challenge the Hubble telescope for pics now I thought. To date it has been a disappointment. Using my previous lens EF 24-70L and their new EF 100-400 IS ii, I see zero improvement and maybe some decrease in picture quality compared to the Mk III !
I shoot in JPEG and RAW formats. Looking at pictures taken with both cameras in JPEG, my files say something along the lines of 12.4 mp in size for both the Mk III and the 5DS R. I've gained nothing apparently in picture quality. I certainly cant see any difference. My iPhone shoots @ 12 mp also and its pictures are just as good. I figured with my 100-400 lens the camera would really show off on my wildlife shots in RAW mode. Nope.....file data shows the pictures to be in the 50 mp range but detail is lost if I zoom the pic up even a small bit. I shoot off a tripod, and have the image stabilization turned off on the lens and the pics are just blah. Its RAW files are really no better than my Mk III's JPEG shots on animals and such.....its really confusing.
Any suggestions? I'm all ears....
Thanks in advance.
