Am I missing something here, I've not really scanned wex or anywhere recently until the new announcement of the 5ds. But when did the 24-70 f4 is appear? The last time I was looking it was a hope for 24-70 2.8 is to materialise. And settling for the 24-105 for the is. What's this f4 is business?!
The F4 came out about 2 years ago IIRC as a cheaper alternative to the F2.8 (and with IS, arguably more useful for most people). I seem to recall people weren't that impressed as they were (rightly) holding fast untile the new F2.8 came out.
The new F2.8 came out about 18 months ago and much to a lot of people's dismay didn't have IS. And not only did it increase in filter size (from 77-82) it also got rid of fixed lens hood (it now moves with the front portion and arguably removes some of the protection that the older design had). It's said to be far sharper than the mk1 but is considerably more expensive than the mk1 ever was.
Must have slipped under the radar for me somewhere, I only noticed it on a package deal with the new 5ds and thought hey what's this. Seems a pointless upgrade if the 24-105 is already in the bag I suppose.
Looking at the 5ds and 5dsR the 5ds seems to have a better image on the shots I've seen. Suppose you can turn it off or on on the R version anyway. Not much in the price between the two. With that sort of file size though I guess its back to the cost of a camera on a memory card. I tried to open a full size shot here. https://photographylife.com/canon-5ds-and-5ds-r-image-samples Took a while. I presume you can select a smaller raw file from the shooting mode for everyday shooting? Not just the full 50mp.
The 24-70 F4 will probably be a hell of a lot sharper than the 24-105, hence the reason it's a bundle lens with the 5Ds.
And no, the extra sharpness of the 5Ds R cannot be turned on/off as you please (it's a modification to the sensor itself that you're paying for), so you've got a difficult decision to make (bearing in mind the 'R' version will be far more prone to moire inteference). I'm somewhat surprised that Canon haven't announced a software solution to the moire problem that may put off potential purchasers as Hasselblad have removed it in software for years with their cameras.
As for file sizes, I'd estimate around 50MB per raw file. I don't really see it as a problem though for two reasons, firstly that memory is effectively so cheap nowadays, and secondly that if you can afford £3k on a camera what's £50-100 on a decent memory card. People are moaning they will need new PCs, they're lying, any reasonable machine that's been bought in the last couple of years will be more than adequate (and even ones 5/6 years old should still be capable of processing the images, albeit more slowly).
That's interesting stuff. I cant remember where I saw the sample images comparisons between the two cameras but the 5ds definitely looked better from what I saw. I was originally just going to go back to a mkiii. As it was awesome. The mk4 I presume only difference will be 4k vid. Which I am not really interested in. But now I am just torn between 5ds and 5dsR. Wex do reasonable finance, so it's not out of reach for most. I certainly wouldn't buy it outright. I just don't really understand what your getting for the extra 100/200 quid on the R version.
The R version effectively has no low-pass/anti-alias filter and as a result will be noticeably sharper (they actually add a filter over the sensor which cancels out the effect of the low pass filter hence the cost)
The drawback is that it'll be much more prone to moire inteference patterns on things like clothing, fences, tiles etc. You can see the inteference pattern in this image I've found on the web:
There's an arguement that if you're going to be shooting clothing or lingerie then the R version would be best avoided. It would however be a godsend to the likes of (say) landscape photographers who are unlikely to shoot things that'll generate those patterns. There are techniques you can use in the likes of Photoshop & Lightroom to eliminate the effects of moire but aren't foolproof and obviously take time and effort to remove.
If I had the money, I'd personally take the risk and go for the R version in the hope that LR/PS could indeed remove them should they appear.