October 23, 2014, 08:10:50 AM

Poll

What upgraded feature would push you to get the mkIV?

Double the battery life?
1 (0.8%)
WIFI, Bluetooth, GPS, etc.
5 (4.2%)
120 double cross type AF points???
4 (3.3%)
2 stops of improved and usable ISO performance (low light capabilities).
80 (66.7%)
A 32 megapixel sensor and a 50mb RAW file.
30 (25%)

Total Members Voted: 120

Author Topic: How much better would the 5D mkIV have to be for you to upgrade from your mkiii?  (Read 18032 times)

Mt Spokane Photography

  • EF 50mm F 0.7 IS
  • *********
  • Posts: 8870
    • View Profile
Two stops of ISO?  I don't think that's theoretically possible.  1/2 stop of ISO is a big difference.
The difference between the original 5D and the 5D MK III is less than 1 stop.  The original 5D is the lowest scoring Canon FF sensor (as far as high ISO is concerned) that DXO has measured.
 
Even the 1D X is a hair less than 1 stop better than the original 5D.

 I would disagree with this.  the 5DIII is one full stop better then the 5DII.  (Shooting RAW)  Testing has shown this as well as my real world experience.  The 5DIII is at least 2 stops better then the 5DC.

I'd be happy to see some reliable test results other than those of DXO.  DXO has a pretty good and accurate test capability.  What many of us do not like is their self assigned sensor ratings which reflects some unknown weightings that may or may not reflect our actual usage.  The accuracy of their basic test results though is well accepted.
 
I've had the original 5D,  two 5D MK II's and two 5D MK III's.  and I'd love to be able to say my MK III's are full stop better than my MK II's.  But that's only wishful thinking.
 
There are well done accurate measurements at DXO of the high ISO capability of various sensors, the range is much narrower than people think.
 
Here is their high ISO rating of CMOS Sensors RAW output since 2004. I did not include the CCD sensor from the original 1DS MK I, (ISO 954) because it was a different technology.
From the lowest to the highest CMOS FF sensor, the difference is about one stop. 
 
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/(type)/usecase_sports
 
 
EOS 5D                 - ISO 1368
 
EOS 1Ds MK II    - ISO 1480
 
EOS 1DS MK III   - ISO 1663
 
EOS 5D MK II       - ISO 1815
 
EOS 5D MK III      - ISO 2293
 
EOS 1D X               -  ISO 2786
 
EOS 6D                   - ISO 2340
 
 
 

canon rumors FORUM


privatebydesign

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2567
  • Ermintrude says "moo"
    • View Profile
One thing that has improved two stops over the life of these ff cameras is the software.

I can use images shot two stops under exposed at max iso now, I couldn't a few years ago. I don't need a new camera, I just have to throw down $150 every year or two to get better and better software that enables ever higher iso performance.
The best time to plant a tree is twenty-five years ago. The second best time is today.

EvillEmperor

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 43
    • View Profile
    • My Flickr
I shoot sports and I'm young and I wasn't able to afford the 1D X (that was never an option) and I had used my school's 7D for a while, and I knew the day the MK III was announced that I would get it one day. I got it a year later and I'm very happy. The only thing I would wish for would be higher FPS, maybe a little lighter, and if the SD slots would be faster. The FPS I find is too slow for baseball, because for a pitcher and batter I don't need continuous auto focus, and I find with 6 fps it's harder to make contact with the ball with the bat. It works great indoors, where the AF doesn't slow down at all, unlike the 7D while shooting.
Canon 5D MK III, Canon T2i, Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS, Canon 24-105, Canon 100 macro, Canon 50 1.4, Canon 430EX II, Canon 28-135mm (sold)

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2438
    • View Profile
I shoot sports and I'm young and I wasn't able to afford the 1D X (that was never an option) and I had used my school's 7D for a while, and I knew the day the MK III was announced that I would get it one day. I got it a year later and I'm very happy. The only thing I would wish for would be higher FPS, maybe a little lighter, and if the SD slots would be faster. The FPS I find is too slow for baseball, because for a pitcher and batter I don't need continuous auto focus, and I find with 6 fps it's harder to make contact with the ball with the bat. It works great indoors, where the AF doesn't slow down at all, unlike the 7D while shooting.

 for baseball,  tripod mount,  focus manually or  spot focus,  and have a wired release  and time it right.   the more you watch,  the  more you practice,  the  easier it gets. 
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L->85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm ->100L & 85L

tpatana

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 258
    • View Profile
Give me most of these and I'll consider:

1: Two (or more) stop improvement on ISO
2: 720p240 (I'd be ok with 1080p240 too)
3: 10fps+ (and naturally plenty of buffer, ~20+ would be nice)
4: Dual-CF slots with separate data channels for writing (so it could flush buffer to both cards, roughly doubling the speed it can empty the buffer)
5: Integrated grip (=1D style body (I know Canon don't want this, they want 1D to look the king))

Not so important but nice to have:

6: GPS/Wifi
7: Dual-pixel AF -thingy
8: Wireless video link for GoogleGlass (or similar), so you could use live-view shooting while watching the scene through your video glasses. Nice for composing/shooting when you must hold the camera at a funny angle/position and can't use the OVF.
9:Couple GBs of internal memory for those moments when you MUST take the shot and you're either just filled your card or were exchanging the card for a fresh one. Such shouldn't happen to a professional, but it does happen to me.
10: 3G/4G modem and capability to upload directly to the service/system of your choice. (I take this back, no respectable photog would upload without editing, only for mag/paper if you must send it right away for the editor)

I'd pay some money if they add all those.

skfla

  • PowerShot G1 X II
  • ***
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Give me most of these and I'll consider:

1: Two (or more) stop improvement on ISO
2: 720p240 (I'd be ok with 1080p240 too)
3: 10fps+ (and naturally plenty of buffer, ~20+ would be nice)
4: Dual-CF slots with separate data channels for writing (so it could flush buffer to both cards, roughly doubling the speed it can empty the buffer)
5: Integrated grip (=1D style body (I know Canon don't want this, they want 1D to look the king))
 

Dude, I'm curious-are you serious or is this american sarcasm/irony?
still a 5D2 fan

Maxaperture

  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 25
    • View Profile
    • My two penneth worth
I moved on (ASAP) from a 7D to a 5DII, and then exchanged that for a 5DIII when I could afford it.
I love it, I feel really spoilt, and we mustn't forget how fast this incredible technology is moving.
However, I do have one disappointment, the focus points, if they could just spread them out  :)
63 points are superb to have, and as we all know, they're seriously effective. But it would be fantastic if they were spread over a larger percentage of the frame.
5DIII  -  500mm f/4 IS  -  70-200mkII -  Tammy 24-70 2.8 VC  -  Siggy 150mm 2.8 OS macro and the stunning 2x MkIII TC

canon rumors FORUM


Canon1

  • Canon 70D
  • ****
  • Posts: 282
    • View Profile
Two stops of ISO?  I don't think that's theoretically possible.  1/2 stop of ISO is a big difference.
The difference between the original 5D and the 5D MK III is less than 1 stop.  The original 5D is the lowest scoring Canon FF sensor (as far as high ISO is concerned) that DXO has measured.
 
Even the 1D X is a hair less than 1 stop better than the original 5D.

 I would disagree with this.  the 5DIII is one full stop better then the 5DII.  (Shooting RAW)  Testing has shown this as well as my real world experience.  The 5DIII is at least 2 stops better then the 5DC.

I'd be happy to see some reliable test results other than those of DXO.  DXO has a pretty good and accurate test capability.  What many of us do not like is their self assigned sensor ratings which reflects some unknown weightings that may or may not reflect our actual usage.  The accuracy of their basic test results though is well accepted.
 
I've had the original 5D,  two 5D MK II's and two 5D MK III's.  and I'd love to be able to say my MK III's are full stop better than my MK II's.  But that's only wishful thinking.
 
There are well done accurate measurements at DXO of the high ISO capability of various sensors, the range is much narrower than people think.
 
Here is their high ISO rating of CMOS Sensors RAW output since 2004. I did not include the CCD sensor from the original 1DS MK I, (ISO 954) because it was a different technology.
From the lowest to the highest CMOS FF sensor, the difference is about one stop. 
 
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings/(type)/usecase_sports
 
 
EOS 5D                 - ISO 1368
 
EOS 1Ds MK II    - ISO 1480
 
EOS 1DS MK III   - ISO 1663
 
EOS 5D MK II       - ISO 1815
 
EOS 5D MK III      - ISO 2293
 
EOS 1D X               -  ISO 2786
 
EOS 6D                   - ISO 2340

I as well have owned these three generations of cameras and my opinion is based solely on real world experience.  I really don't hold much stock in tests that DXO or any other outfit performs.  They are a nice comparison on paper but once you get out into the field that "testing" doesn't always hold true.

Perhaps I should elaborate on my statement.  I believe that the 5DIII is a full stop better then the 5DII regarding noise for a couple of reasons.  The type of noise between these two cameras is very different.  The 5DII has colorful noise which in my opinion eats up detail and is not that easy to eliminate in post without even more detail loss.  The 5DIII has strictly luminance noise (in the usable iSO range) which is much more easy to eliminate in post and the detail retention is much much better.  Images shot at ISO 6400 with the 5DIII are often better out of camera then ISO 3200 of the 5DII.  Then because the noise is easier to manage there is even a larger divergence.

I find that I rarely apply NR on images shot at ISO 3200 or below.  It almost looks to me as if the luminance noise of the 5DIII resembles sharpening artifacts.  Either way I'm confident shooting at 1-2 stops higer in ISO with my 5DIII then my 5dII.  Hopefully this explanation helps clarify where I am coming from with my comments.  Happy shooting.  :)
« Last Edit: July 19, 2013, 06:26:03 PM by Canon1 »

mrsfotografie

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1425
  • www.mrsfotografie.nl
    • View Profile
    • MRS fotografie
I've decided to skip the 5DIII upgrade and wait to see if the 5D4 will be a big enough leap forward to even consider upgrading. Quite happy with the Mk2 right now.

I concur.

So I choose "2 stops of improved and usable ISO performance (low light capabilities)" compared to the MkIII to make me upgrade to a MkIV from my MkII.

Going from a MkII to a MkIII is not worth it IQ-wise.

On second thought maybe a 1D style body would be an upgrade ergonomically (haven't ever used one so can't really say). However for this reason a 1D series body is quite possibly the next step in my upgrade path although it really is a lot of money. I expect the 5D series to remain the more compact form factor it is now.
5D3, 5D2, Sony α6000, G16 | SY14 f/2.8, Ʃ20 f/1.8, 24 f/2.8, 35 f/2, Ʃ35 f/1.4A, 50 f/1.8 I, Ʃ50 f/1.4 EX, 100L Macro, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 1.4x II, 70-300L, 100-400L | E-mount: SY12 f/2, Ʃ19 & 30 f/2.8 EX DN, 16-70 ZA OSS, 55-210 OSS, Metabones SB | FT-QL, AE-1P | FD(n) & FL lenses

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2219
  • Could not wait for 7D2 so I got the 5D3
    • View Profile
I would not upgrade to a 5DIV. My second body will be a crop camera - possibly after 2 to 3 years. Replacement of the 5DIII will be much later. Even if the 5DIV had all those listed, I'd stay with my 5DIII.

danski0224

  • Canon 7D MK II
  • *****
  • Posts: 549
    • View Profile
    • Some of my Work in Progress
I still haven't figured out how to use all of the stuff in the 5DIII, so an upgrade wouldn't make much sense for me.

If there is an update for the 1DsIII, and if I could afford it, that would pique my interest.

Some of my Work in Progress..... www.dftimages.com

jdramirez

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2438
    • View Profile
I would not upgrade to a 5DIV. My second body will be a crop camera - possibly after 2 to 3 years. Replacement of the 5DIII will be much later. Even if the 5DIV had all those listed, I'd stay with my 5DIII.

I believe we are in the same boat.  It's a nice boat though.
Upgrade  path.->means the former was sold for the latter.

XS->60D->5d Mkiii:18-55->24-105L:75-300->55-250->70-300->70-200 f4L USM->70-200 f/2.8L USM->70-200 f/2.8L IS Mkii:50 f/1.8->50 f/1.4->100L->85mm f/1.8 USM-> 8mm ->100L & 85L

rpt

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2219
  • Could not wait for 7D2 so I got the 5D3
    • View Profile
I would not upgrade to a 5DIV. My second body will be a crop camera - possibly after 2 to 3 years. Replacement of the 5DIII will be much later. Even if the 5DIV had all those listed, I'd stay with my 5DIII.

I believe we are in the same boat.  It's a nice boat though.
My perspective is that I got myself a professional camera (now some of these 1D folks may object but I am "standing my ground" ;) technically I am sitting but wth!) and I am going to need that time to use all the features including the ones that ML unlocks! Dual ISO! Wow! Hmmmmm back to the topic - yes, it will take me time to accumulate the moolah to get to the next FF.  :)

canon rumors FORUM


Krob78

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1322
  • When in Doubt, Press the Shutter...
    • View Profile
1. Two stops improved noise performance.
2. Improved Dynamic Range
3. Two Compact Flash card slots that operate at equal rates
4. Expanded AF points
5. Higher Silent Frame Rate

I do not have the need for a larger file.
Quote
5. Higher Silent Frame Rate
Agree with everything here but the higher silent frame rate would be really great!  I've thought that since day one!
Ken

5D Mark III, 100-400L, 70-200 2.8L II, 24-105L, 16-35L IS, 17-40L, 85mm 1.8, Samy 14mm 2.8,  600 EX-RT, 580EX II, 430EX II, 1.4X III, 2.0X III

Zv

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1266
    • View Profile
    • Zeeography (flickr)
I've decided to skip the 5DIII upgrade and wait to see if the 5D4 will be a big enough leap forward to even consider upgrading. Quite happy with the Mk2 right now.

I concur.

So I choose "2 stops of improved and usable ISO performance (low light capabilities)" compared to the MkIII to make me upgrade to a MkIV from my MkII.

Going from a MkII to a MkIII is not worth it IQ-wise.

On second thought maybe a 1D style body would be an upgrade ergonomically (haven't ever used one so can't really say). However for this reason a 1D series body is quite possibly the next step in my upgrade path although it really is a lot of money. I expect the 5D series to remain the more compact form factor it is now.

I don't think the 5 series will ever have the built in battery grip design as the 5D line was created just to make FF more compact. Personally the 1D style body just seems too big and would just take up room in my bag!
5D II | 17-40L | 24-105L | 70-200 f4L IS | 135L | SY 14 2.8 | Sigma 50 1.4

EOS M | 11-22 IS STM | 22 STM | FD 50 1.4

canon rumors FORUM