1D Mark IV Rumors
Starting to heat up a bit
Over the last week or so there have been some new 1D Mark IV Rumors. This is a recap and some new information.
Short Specs 1: [NL via XI]
16mp
Full Frame
Lower Noise
Suggests an early summer announcement
Spec List 2: [POTN]
18.2mp
Full Frame
12fps
65 Zone Metering
48 AF Points
Mirror won’t move. (?)
VF Larger & Brighter
WiFi Capabilities built in
Fake 1D4 Shot
If this is real, I'll eat a worm.
The above is from a Fred Miranda forum thread.
New Information
I still have a couple of good sources that say you will not see a new 1D Mark IV until February. The current fix for the 1D bodies was designed to give people another year with the cameras and correct any outstanding issues.
One source went as far as giving a short spec list.
Specs:
16 mp
11 fps
DIGIC V
3″ LCD
Ergonomic Upgrades
No AF information
If February 2010 is the actual announcement timeframe, then I don’t think any spec list can be 100% accurate. Final specifications would probably not be decided upon.
cr
April 18th, 2009 at 7:38 am
I think it would be very unlikely for Canon to make the regular 1D a full frame camera. That would definetly make a cut in their 1Ds sales.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
no. the Ds is resolution oriented not sensor size oriented. what it would do is let them sell more 1D cameras, since people who shoot and need both proper wide-angle lenses and high iso low noise will have that in one camera.
Reply
Rangefinder Bob Reply:
August 30th, 2009 at 1:54 am
Agree with Zac. Just like Nikon D3/D3X, D2h/D2X–choice of high FPS/low MP or lower FPS/High res. Two different cameras for two different users/markets. Like cars–you can use a sedan to deliver sofas, but it’s probably better to use a truck; same with cameras–use the camera to fit the need.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 8:28 am
16mp, full frame and 10 or more shots per second… You just described my next dream camera (eventhough it is nothing more than an unsubstantiated rumour :-)
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 9:08 am
I wouldn’t want full frame, I have the 5d MK 2, A $5000 full frame I don’t want. I guess I better buy a 1D MK III before the demand drives the price way up. If replaced by full frame, they will be much more in demand by the sp[orts and birding folks.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 6:48 pm
crop in post with the additional resolution. problem solved, or maybe some dynamic cropping a la Nikon.
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
then explain how the D3 has become the cherished child of the sports shooting world? besides there is better bokeh on larger sensor sizes which is very important for sports. probably the only people who would be pissed are the birders, but if the 60D has a decent AF system then thay can just use that
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 1:16 pm
The sports shooting world will never use a non-pro model like a 60D
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 2:47 pm
Birders
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
in my view birders would prefer 1.6, at least I do when I’m shooting birds, but for sports, if you’re a pro you’re on the sidelines not in the bleachers, so the magnification is less of a benefit. I use my 135mm 2.0 for basketball as 200mm is at times too strong, adding 1.6 on that creates more of a problem and I prefer full frame. But for wildlife I like the 1.6, just not the build quality of the 50D, which outdoors is an issue. I’ve used my old 1D for the 1.3 in bad weather just because the 50D would not handle it and I dont want to buy another one. But I’d rather the 1.3 was a 1.6.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
David, you misread/misinterpreted the comment.
“then explain how the D3 has become the cherished child of the sports shooting world? besides there is better bokeh on larger sensor sizes which is very important for sports. probably the only people who would be pissed are the birders, but if the 60D has a decent AF system then thay can just use that”
translation. Sports = FF, better bokeh and high ISO, the birders want a longer crop anyway, so if the 60D has decent AF the BIRDERS can use it. not the sports shooters they will use the 1D IV, possibly with some dynamic crop to 1.3x when they want it, or crop in post on the select good images.
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Yeah my comment was kinda morphed to several posts, so it wasn’t clear.
As an avid wildlife shooter myself, my biggest problem with the 50D/60D is outdoor toughness. I can’t stand teleconverters, and I’m not a fan of cropping in post to that degree, call me old fashioned but I want to see what I’m shooting through the lens. 1.3 is not a big advantage compared to 1.6 for wildlife imo (only turns my 400 into 520 instead of a 640, big difference when you’re shooting wild birds). So for me Canon doesn’t offer a great wildlife camera at this point. I’d like a 1Dx body with a 1.6 crop for the ultimate wildlife camera.
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
also the list of 1D cmaeras is $4500, not $5000
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 9:18 am
in the photograph, the LCD display doesn’t seem larger than 3″ ? or maybe it’s just me.
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
it seems larger to me too.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 11:12 am
I think Canon must go to something between medium format and faster camera for the pro-sumers,
the Nikon D3X is almost a medium format in terms of MP, so, i think the pro evolution for Canon must be in terms of increasing the MP and doing some Faster FPS body with other new fetures such as progressive E-TTL system that’s really works, and high cleaner ISO up to 25,600.
that’s it.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 11:16 am
I definitely don’t want the 1D to be full frame. Though a 16mp 1.3x crop does sound very good to me for birding with a 500mm f/4L so I don’t have to lug around a 600mm f/4L
HD Video would be nice to have though :)
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 11:39 am
What if it has the same pixel density, with a 1.3x crop option? The quality will be identical, but for those who want full frame, this will remain a feasible camera.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 11:46 am
I thought Canon was supposed to be phasing out the 1.3x crop sensor? Those specs would be great if they kept it on the 1.3. It would be nice to see Canon do the smart thing and work on noise reduction and fps instead of just cranking up the MP.
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 12:27 pm
Where in the world did you hear that Canon is phasing out the 1.3x?
Reply
David Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 11:36 am
Why have 1.3 at all if you can get the speed you want out of a full frame sensor?
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
it was originally for the reach, but it has become a bit of a legacy now. It is more useful than 1.6 though. your 300 becomes a 400, the 400 a 500, and the wide-angle lenses are still wide. personally I’d rather FF, but back when they made the original 1D the 1.3x crop was a really good idea.
Reply
David Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 9:32 pm
Ok, I thought the 1.3 crop was to squeeze extra fps out of it. I’d rather just have 1.6 and FF myself, I use the 50D just to get my 400 2.8 to be a 640 2.8, my 135 2.0 to a 216 2.0 at times. If they could get the fps out of a FF sensor and drop the 1.3 entirely I’d never miss it.
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 11:03 pm
have you used a 1.3x? just curious
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Sure, my old 1D is a 1.3 crop. I switched to the Ds line for the full frame when it came out though.
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 4:22 pm
Ok, because I have found 1.3x crop actually useful, just a little telephoto boost, but wide-angle lenses still useful, I would prefer FF, but i’ll take a 1.3 over a 1.6 in almost every situation, the obvious exception being when i really need reach.
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 5:33 pm
Yeah, I also prefer FF except for when I want the extra reach, then I’d like the 1.6. 1.3 is not much of a boost on the tele end. Personally I find 1.3 very significant on the wide side, turns my 16mm into a 20mm, a very big difference. So I’m not happy with 1.3 at all, it’s too mild on the tele-boost and too strong of a wide-boost.
Reply
Ted Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 4:29 am
I thought it was originally because the 1.3x size was the largest die they could expose without having to move the stepper and use a second photomask. For full-frame, the stepper had to move leading to alignment problems, lower yields and higher costs. Since then, Canon have developed steppers that can expose a 50mm x 50mm die, so the economic benefit of a 1.3x crop is no longer a factor.
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 1:04 pm
Well, my own observation of buying the 1D 1.3 crop is that I went from 8 fps on that to 3 fps on the 1Ds full frame when it came a year later in 2002, and ever since the 1D line has sported much faster fps than it’s FF counter part. I just assumed the crop was for speed of processing faster fps, but I could be wrong.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
The speed is image siR related, not really sensor size related. 1d classic is about 32 megapixela per second and the Ds was about 33. So roughly same processing
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
OK, so why was the 1D 8fps and 1Ds only 3fps if not for the difference in MP?
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 4:14 pm
it is the difference in megapixels, not the physical size of the sensor. btw the sensors are nre not at the same pixel density, the Ds is a a good deal denser.
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
I’m just trying to understand what you’re saying. I’ve never researched this issue.
Doesn’t a larger sensor provide more room for bigger MP given the same pixel density? If so, it seems to me fps would definately be slower on a FF sensor given the bigger MP it’s processing if everything else were the same components on the cameras.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 8:52 pm
your deduction is correct, but the cameras are not at the same pixel density, which is why the 1D cameras have better noise @ 100% than the Ds cameras. the point is the actual size of the sensor doesn’t slow the camera, just the extra resolution. so assuming they make a FF camera with not too many pixels it can be very fast, with good noise performance. winning combo.
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 12:24 am
ah ok
David Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 9:52 am
How come my ID showed as Anonymous? That was me.
April 18th, 2009 at 11:48 am
Please, please, please make the 1D full-frame! I love my 5DII, but I want pro-AF and a second memory slot, without paying $8000. Just do what Nikon has done with the D3 and give it an in-camera crop to keep the crop fans happy.
The 1Ds can simply be differentiated by huge resolution. Based on 40D vs. 50D pixel density and image quality, I think full-frame could go to 33-35mp before suffering. The difference can be the same, the 1D optimized for action/sports, the 1Ds optimized for studio.
Reply
Ivar Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 1:24 pm
I’d be really surprised if the next 1D was using a cropped sensor.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
as long as the 1d IV has the same ISO quality as the D3, and no faulty AF, I would be happy.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 6:51 pm
have you seen the 5dII ISO performance vs the mkIII, it is basically even. meaning when they make a FF sensor with less resolution, it is very possible that they will gain a good advantage over the D3 in terms of noise
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 1:17 pm
16MP sounds low if it is going full frame. That would leave 9.5MP in the area covered by the 1.3x crop or 6.25MP in the area covered by a 1.6x crop. I’d have thought, if they are dropping the 1.3x crop, they would want the full frame to at least have the same pixel count in that area so as 1D users don’t see it as a downgrade. 18.2MP gives 10.8MP in the 1.3x crop area so seems more reasonable.
If they combined the 1D & 1Ds into one camera, i.e. took the best specs from each, I’m sure it would be a fantastic tool but it would depend if they could offer them cheap enough to appeal.
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
I suspect the lower MP would be to increase the fps, which the 1D typically has as it’s hallmark, as a camera could process 16MP faster than 21MP.
Reply
Ted Reply:
April 24th, 2009 at 8:11 am
The crop factor is about 1.25x, not the advertised 1.3x, so that gets you back to 10MP again.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 3:21 pm
A dedicated mirror lock up button PLEASE~~~~~~~~~~
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 6:53 pm
omfg
Have you ever heard of liveview???????
It is mirror lockup, with critical magnified focusing thrown in.
Reply
Kufucius Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 4:51 am
it’s still different eh.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 5:55 pm
“spec 2 / mirror will not move”:
Ahhh … the return of the pellicle.
An idea whose time has come again?
Reply
max Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
the comeback of DLRs???
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Oh yeah, the old EOS RT and it’s pellicle mirror, bet they could do it even better with today’s tech, and it might solve some HD video control issues too.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 6:57 pm
hey everyone, remember this
http://www.canonrumors.com/?s=Autofocus+Patent&x=0&y=0
If they put that in, then they get continuous AF tracking while shooting at the reduction of about 1/2 stop, which given what high ISO performance is becoming shouldn’t be a problem at most Pro sports events.
I suspect the implementation will be something like the 1N RS, where there is a way to switch between using the pellicle mirror and having the mirror reflex like a normal SLR
Reply
Canon Rumors Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 8:28 pm
Not even I remembered that. Thanks for pointing it out.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 7:50 pm
I really hope the real design will be better, I don’t see any “ergonomic improvements” on that picture. One that is long overdue would be a touch-screen (OLED preferably) with programmable soft buttons.
Reply
Q Reply:
April 18th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
Ooh… I love the idea of an iPhone-like interface on the back of the camera (with a proximity sensor so you don’t change things with your nose).
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Make the 60D a 1.3 and the 1D Mark IV a full frame. Keep the 1.6s for the rebel line. My opinion.
Reply
Musouka Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 4:00 am
And lost the EF-S support? Not likely.
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 19th, 2009 at 8:32 pm
And surrander the whole high-end 1.6/DX market to Nikon.
WON’T happen!
Reply
ms Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 7:47 am
1.6x is a dying format…. 15mp is already too much and Im sure we’ll see a 20+mp 1.6x before long…these manufacturers can’t help themselves…. while I don’t think the 60D is going to signal the death of 1.6x (for one, I don’t think an FF chip has gotten cheap enough to throw it into an XXD body without significantly changing the price point) I do think that eventually 1.6x will grow into a light/travel/enthusiast format, (perhaps eventually devolving into something like the micro 4/3 cams, with electric VFs and no mirror boxes) while 35mm will take back over the SLR realm… just MHO
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 1:33 pm
Canon has the EF-S lens line based on 1.6 crop, doubt that is dying.
Personally I’d like to see a 60Ds full frame, a 60D 1.6, a 1D mkIVc 1.6, 1D mkIV FF, 1Ds mkIV FF or some similar mix so we could have a real choice of crop/FF options from prosumer to pro bodies.
Reply
gwac Reply:
April 22nd, 2009 at 12:50 pm
For every pro/enthusiast that goes full frame, I’m sure there are at least a dozen people buying their first DSLR. And almost all of them are buying crop cameras, because for the first-time buyer it’s a no-brainer! $500 vs. $2500??? The 1.6 crop is not going away any time soon.
Reply
April 18th, 2009 at 11:01 pm
isn’t the picture a modification of this one?
http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0702/Canon/eos1dmkiii-back.jpg
Reply
me Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 8:47 am
it definately is since he didn’t even manage to completely remove the dpreview watermark in the middle if you look closely at the top of the wheel for example :)
Reply
Nigel Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 9:26 am
A lot of work has gone into getting that fiurth button below the lower LCD if that’s the case.
If it’s genuine, then it looks like dual CF!
Reply
Nigel Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 9:27 am
For “fiurth” read “fourth”.
Reply
April 19th, 2009 at 12:45 am
I cannot buy a 1d because I know I cannot justify It’s price for my business. But I always rented 1Ds bodys for assignments that required large resolutions. I stopped doing that since I received my 5d mark II. I wonder what canon will do to let me start renting their 1d bodies again…
Reply
April 19th, 2009 at 4:22 am
you know… those new specs are my dream camera, especially that first one. i think with those mega pixel count, the new, hopefully more improved IQ, and noise reduction, coupled with more focusing points… hell… id save up and shell out 5g’s (hopefully it wont be that much) for that camera. i could do without the video if it meant a less expensive camera… i know that wouldn’t happen though.
Reply
April 19th, 2009 at 7:08 am
Hmm, aren’t some of these specs recycled from the 5DII rumors? The 16MP part sure is.
Reply
April 19th, 2009 at 3:47 pm
A digital version of the EOS 1RS film camera.
Reply
April 19th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
One of the biggest things that made the D3/D700 so popular was its unrivaled quality at high iso’s.
What Canon needs to do is come out with a camera with 12-16mp’s that blows the D3/D700 out of the water… That is what sells, not an extra frame or two per second. You really are running into diminishing returns going from 10fps to 12fps, or 14mps to 18mps.
They must be able to do it, the 21mp 5DII is close to matching D3/D700 iso quality, so just drop it down and perfect it.
Reply
bug Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 4:00 am
exactly…. thank you.
Reply
Anthony Reply:
April 24th, 2009 at 1:53 am
Agreed. In many tests the 700D seems to show slightly less (or at least, less annoying) noise than the 5DmkII, but the thing that strikes me is that the Canon is doing that with 75% more pixel density. I would think that were Canon to put the 5DmkII sensor tech into a 12-15MP FF sensor it would best the 700D by at least half a stop. Make it 4+ fps and it would be a great general-purpose camera and would rock for family photos (my G6 loses so badly indoors that I’m a bit fixated on high-ISO performance for my next camera).
Reply
April 20th, 2009 at 2:09 am
[...] Von CR: [...]
April 20th, 2009 at 3:14 am
[...] [Canonrumors] [...]
April 20th, 2009 at 6:10 am
[...] Canon Rumors post about the upcoming Canon 1D Mark IV, CR says that they have it on good word that the 1D Mark IV will arrive February 2010. Related Posts:AkihabaraNews Unboxing Canon Mark II5DMk2 blog @1001noisycamerasFull HD Video Screenshot From AkihabaraExpert Ask Crucial Questions for Canon EOSMore From Japan – Canon’s 5D Mark II AF TestSHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: “Canon 1D Mark IV Rumor”, url: “http://www.aperturedaily.com/canon-1d-mark-iv-rumor/” }); Sphere: Related Content [...]
April 20th, 2009 at 7:41 am
lol…here come the fake pictures…. shouldn’t the LCD have the slight blue hue from the anti-reflection/scratch resistant coatings that the 50D/5D MKII have
Reply
April 20th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Well, most of this stuff sounds quite decent to me. 16MP would be enough for me (I’d be even content with 12MP or so).
Although personally I wouldn’t mind a FF sensor on the 1D4, I don’t think that this will happen mainly for two reasons:
1. It would be too much of rival to the 1Ds series which I don’t see abandoned in the near future.
2. Most 1D series users should by well accostomed to the 1.3 crop in various aspects (handling, “teleconverter” for long lenses etc), so dropping the 1.3 crop could result in some irritation in the pro user community.
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 1:43 pm
The cameras are targeted at very different pro worlds, the 1D line is the sports line where the priority is fast fps over higher MP. If they can give the fast fps for sports in a full frame I think it would be welcomed. At 16 or 18 MP and 11 fps it would still not be competing with the 1Ds mkIII’s 21 MP but much slower 5 fps. But who knows? Canon will bump the 500D up to almost the same specs as the 50D as they already have the 60D coming down pipes in a few months, so they dont seem too concerned about temporary overlap. If Canon really wanted to get the sports market dominately back, they should come out with a 21MP FF 12FPS body and we’d see all white lenses on the sidelines again.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
High ISO noise anyone yeah the 5 D2 is good, but it could be so much better with a few less pixels. no need for that much resolution it just starts to get in the way.
Reply
David Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
Maybe it does maybe it doesn’t. All depends on how much progress the R&D department has made.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 20th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
true, but i doubt a quantum leap, and the computing power to deal with 21 MP at 10 fps could become a problem for a lot of people.
Reply
Anonymous Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 12:30 am
I expect it will not be long until the 1D line is up to 21MP and the 1Ds line up to 28MP – storage and computers keep getting better too.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 12:50 am
btw, the Ds is typically just over twice the resolution of the 1D and half the framerate. So, if the 1D is 21MP, the Ds from that generation should be around 42-45 megapixels. I have no doubt that that will happen eventually, might be even generation after next, but I’ll crap bricks if they can make the 1D mkIV 21MP @10fps or higher and still beat the D3 in high ISO
Reply
David Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 9:42 am
Good observation. But with the 5D2 already at 21MP, the Rebel already at 15MP, I would not be surprised if the 1D4 is higher MP than 16MP. The 5D went from 12 to 21 in one swoop. Also, Canon must be aware Nikon is working on the next D3. In my opinion Canon had better produce something amazing if they want to regain any market share.
I’m working with stills from my 1Ds3’s (21MP), and storage is a constant issue, but until they hit medium format range I’m not gonna be saying ok that’s enough MP – I can always lower the capture MP, or in post, but you can not go bigger from smaller.
Reply
April 21st, 2009 at 3:39 am
I would think if Canon did their homework it will be smart to go with a 16-18 mp sensor with matching or better High ISO/Low Noise than the D3. Or if they are up to the usual than it would be an improved 21 mp 5D MK2 sensor. I would say : 1D MK4
Full Frame with a 1.3 crop mode
1 full stop in ISO performance from the D3
17 megapixels
ISO 100-12,800. L1-50, H1-25,600, H2-51,200
53-60 point AF System Redesigned with Real Time Tracking
A Mirror box that can handle 15 FPS
720p 30FPS, 1080i 24, 30FPS Movie Mode with better AF
In camera editing software
and a lot more that would be considered as a significant step up from the previous model. And have a 3 year shelf life with out the collecting dust in the closet like the 1D MK3 did over its rival.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 3:47 am
just curious, why the in camera editing software? Nikon, to my knowledge doesn’t have that, or doesn’t advertise it in their pro bodies because pros are almost certainly using heavy editing programs like photoshop couple with less capable batch editing programs like DPP, aperture, and lightroom.
personally I would bet on a 15.1 MP sensor, since the 1D and xxD and rebel from a given generation typically have the same resolution. the rest of your stats, save video, about which I know little to nothing, and as such will not comment look dead on to me. though I would like to see a pellicle mirror system (switchable, of course) implemented.
Reply
David Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 10:29 am
It’s just wrong to have a 1D anything the same MP as a Rebel…lol
In camera editing? Why? Who wants to edit on a 3″ screen?
15 fps would be interesting. If they could get that to 24 fps it would be a wet dream for the indie crowd, you could batch import the stills into Premiere or Edius and have raw 4K video – that’s big budget feature film quality.
Reply
David Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 10:20 am
Hopefully you are incorrect about the 1080i 24. It should be 1080p 30/24fps, 1080i 60/50.
Also, on the photo above what is with the mic holes on the back by the HD button?
Reply
Nigel Reply:
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:20 am
> Also, on the photo above what is with the mic holes on the back by the HD button?
What about them? That’s where they are on the 1D3. Are you suggesting that the photoshopper should’ve moved them? :D
Reply
David Reply:
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:01 am
I’m suggesting they were moved. They look slightly out of proportion to each other, like the bottom of the camera was widened a bit in photoshop to fit the fourth “HD” button, which looks like a cut and paste of the trash button.
Reply
Nigel Reply:
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:17 am
> Full Frame with a 1.3 crop mode
I really don’t understand the point of crop mode. What’s wrong with cropping in post?
And all this talk of ‘extra reach’ with 1.3 vs FF is confusing to me. It’s just a crop on capture, no?
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:34 am
the key is a “dynamic crop” which puts a viewfinder mask in place so one can accurately frame, and then genuinely discards the sides of the image (help buffer) that’s actually useful if you’re shooting a sports events and would like a bit more reach and buffer, but most of the time want a FF camera. So that is the point of a “dynamic crop mode”
btw the 1.3 isn’t a crop on capture, its a permanent crop based on the sensor size, I’m not sure I get your question, or that I’m explaining it well, but…
Reply
Nigel Reply:
April 22nd, 2009 at 10:35 am
Yes, that’s kinda what I meant, permanent crop based on sensor size. My point was that I think the extra reach of cropped sensors is just a fallacy. At the end of the day there’s no extra zoom with a crop vs. FF sensor, just detail lost from the edges.
Reply
gwac Reply:
April 22nd, 2009 at 1:02 pm
But if it has a higher pixel density than the full frame that means additional detail in the cropped area, assuming the lens can stand up to the added resolution.
Reply
Nigel Reply:
April 22nd, 2009 at 4:01 pm
True, possibly countered with greater noise. But the crop sensor aficionados have never claimed that crop gives them greater reach because of greater pixel density, just that it gives them greater reach.
But pixel density aside (and that’s related to the sensor itself, not solely it’s crop/dimensions) crop factor adds nothing in and of itself. No?
Reply
gwac Reply:
April 27th, 2009 at 9:58 am
“Greater reach” is a misleading way to state it, and I doubt that most people who say that understand the technical concepts involved with the 1.6x crop. They only understand that they get a more “zoomed-in” image, and therefore associate it with “reach”.
A more correct way of thinking about it would be “more detail in the cropped portion at the expense of lost detail at the edges and poorer high ISO performance.” But in good light, this doesn’t matter much does it? I don’t doubt that there are professional applications where the 1.6 crop is more desirable than full frame or 1.3. That said, I am a novice and shoot 1.6 because I plain can’t afford FF, and I don’t mind the size/weight advantages of a rebel either.
Reply
Zac Reply:
April 22nd, 2009 at 2:05 pm
what gwac said.
basically as long as it is denser than the FF that holds true
Reply
April 21st, 2009 at 8:24 am
[...] es kein Wunder, dass die Ger
April 21st, 2009 at 10:45 am
As a professional sport photographer, i think ISO is the most important. Since we need speed and flash is not allowed. I don’t really care carry a 328 or 428, the weight will be on monopod, therefore a crop sensor is not my tea.
Reply
David Reply:
April 21st, 2009 at 11:22 am
A friend of mine shoots for SI. His big concern is also clean high ISO for faster shutter speeds but also fps of which he seems eager for more. Resolution is also important to him as posters get made and you never know if a shot might end up on a billboard.
Reply
April 22nd, 2009 at 8:09 am
This fake photograph is pure fun. By the way, the author is not an old follower in SLR/DSLR world, since Canon launched an icon for mirror lock-up function since EOS 3 at the least: why should they place a ML command?
Reply
April 29th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Happened to see a photographer who had a prototype at one of the events I was shooting. It shot 15fps in the cropped mode, and 12.3fps in full format mode. It was also 18 megapixels. That is all I was able to get out of him. He was also using the 70-200mm f2.8 lens.
Reply
June 29th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
The Mark 4 is going to be called the Mark 5,,. Shortly after July 15 when the Canon lens rebates are over expect the release of the Mark 5. Save your green the camera is the ROCKING BOMB.. Your must have camera.. Nikon watch out your about to be left in the dust for 5 years.
Reply
August 5th, 2009 at 8:16 am
Errr…what date is today ?.
Reply
Shug Reply:
August 5th, 2009 at 9:39 am
Full moon
Reply
August 26th, 2009 at 11:31 am
[...] Initial reports to us said the same thing some time ago. [...]