Very Nice
Dan Chung got to test drive a couple prototype 1D Mark IV’s for a night at the horse track.
Take a look at the results:
Canon 1DmkIV _ The races from Dan Chung on Vimeo.
Read More: http://www.dslrnewsshooter.com/….
cr
|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
That looks great. I can’t wait to get my 7D (a 1D is a long way off for me) so I can try out the Canon video functions.
I’m starting to believe that 1D4 is a video camera. All I see are a few videos but not samples at the real usable ISO speeds. Yeah, I don’t care about 102,400 but I want to see samples in low light at 6,400 and 12,800.
Canon’s approach to this launching is simply annoying. The worst ever (followed by the 5D2, the called “revolution” which in fact was an evolution only) ( nice improvements but not the expected due the advertisement)
Wow! This video and Revolution are simply stunning from a DSLR.
Dan is a Pro PJ, and does a great job adding video to his stills. This is what news publications want now, both stills and video.
Then take a look around the internet
http://jeffascough.typepad.com/jeff_ascough_blog/2009/11/canon-1dmkiv-at-a-wedding.html
Hmm, can someone tell me what FPS is that? Is is faster than 60 FPS and are we going to see some 300-500 or faster FPS photo cameras on the market, or is highspeed reserved for the goofs at Time Warp on Discovery?
The Casio Exilim Pro EX-F1 (Jan 2008) can do 1200fps, though not in anything that might be confused with HD. I don’t think it was their first to sport frame rates in the 100’s.
You can film in 60fps, turn the playback to 12fps and have a program interpolate an extra frame between every frame to reach 24fps, or some combination thereof heh.
I’m with you. I can’t think of a situation where I would use 102,400 but I’d use 6400 and 12,800 all the time. I just hope that they aren’t completely laughable compared to the D3s.
that was a pleasure to watch! love the quality of the video along with the actual composition and all that…
Pretty cool.
This is a great camera indeed. I wish I had $5K to blow on it. Wow.
$5K buys a Canon 5DMII + Canon 7D + Nice Lens selection
1DMarkIV body.
Yeah, I’m thinking that it will seem like 240fps, but you will lose out on some of the finer movements. I suggest frame blending , but that will require lots of RAM and rendering power.
Let’s face it, there is NO real picture to evaluate right now. Yes, there are some stuff online but those are beta cameras and many dudes… I can change EXIF information too.
I’d love to see solid information and samples to make my mind. I want the camera, but I’m in no rush and I don’t want to buy something that expensive blind…
I cannot imagine just going to B&H and buy it the release day without even seeing samples of pictures. Yes, the video looks impressive and if it were my deal, I would buy it after seeing those examples but I want it for pictures in low light.
Gamble addicts…we gear addicts understand
Nobody really cares about the video. Hey Canon let’s see some decent images produced with this camera instead of jerking us around for the past month.
Actually heaps of people care about the video.
It could even be a bigger market than the stills side of it.
Why else do you think Canon are investing so much effort in promoting the video side?
Yeah, adding the first ever 1080p video DSLR ability to the 5D2 was no revolution at all, the whole camera was just a minor update, just another slow evolution of tweaks…right.
Yeah, no cares about video at all, youtube and TV/Cable networks should not even be in business, because no one cares about it…
This wasn’t about youtube and tv, it’s about a camera being a camera, not some over-rated video add-on that makes it so much better than ANY other device for capturing video.
Canon is so happy to show “video” captured with the device but not images. Open your eyes..
Nonsense. Lot’s of TV shows, and web delivered shows, are using the 5D2 and 7D now, not to mention event shooters, so your claim it is just an over-rated video add-on is ridiculous. Open your own eyes. The cameras are great at stills too.
I am so sick of this video crap. I am a stills photographer, i use the 1D’s for stills. Really, If you want to do video/movie then go and do 3 year degree at film school. Stills / Video – completely different disciplines, completely different way of shooting and thinking. I have to laugh at people that think, ‘wow it does video, I think that’s what I will specialize in now, Video “. Do you see Nachtwey, Salgado shooting video?? no and you never will. Again if you want to shooting video/movies go and do a 3 year degree, it is insulting to think “oh yer, the camera does video, i will become a expert in 6 weeks and try and book clients with that feature”. Pathetic.
Being you are only a stills photographer and you cleary do not know squat about video, you have no business telling people who shoot video what to do and your comment is both ignornant and insulting to all the many people who do shoot video with DSLR’s, including lots of pros.
+10
You didn’t need a 7D or 5D previously tv and web and you definitely don’t need a Mark IV to prove something better. The fact is these camera’s have added on crippled video capabilities that pro camcorders will continue to dominate in usage. People act like the 5D II changed the world with video, it didn’t and nor will this camera, it’s a non-factor. If this over-priced camera can’t focus for stills then maybe it’s usefulness for shooting video might be it’s only consolation.
I’m guessing you didn’t go to film school?
I must say that I lean towards – peters – comment. If you are a great stills photography then your talent as a stills photographer is what sells you. Unless trained in the area, shooting combined video and stills for a client is somewhat ‘gimmicky’, relying on what you can ‘give’ a client as opposed to the client wanting you for your natural ability as a photographer. Look at Jeff Ascough, he does not need to to shoot video, he does not need to buy a client with ‘and i shoot video too, please book me’, his natural gifts as a stills photographer are enough to impress. He does not need to use technology upon technology upon technology to attract clientele. Akin to a chef who specializes in French, but will do German as well to get bums on seats.
So I guess the video made your mind to get a “photography” camera?
Because their latest video cameras and even RED, as far as I know, are great! perhaps I’ll buy one of those for my “photography” since those can take still images too. duh!
Completely untrue. I have several pro HD video cameras, from Panasonic and Canon, collecting dust because the 5D2 blows them away. It’s the amature home video camcorders that are better for family uses, but for pro video the 5D2/7D/1D4 are by far the best short of RED. The 5D2 did change the world of video, and it focuses great and delivers awesome stills too.
I bought the 5D2 both for pro photography and video work. RED is way more expensive, and more cumbersome to work with, so that’s in another ball park. Canon’s pro HD line is still only HDV, 1440x1080i not full HD 1920x1080p, and the 5D2 records almost twice the bandwidth at 47 million megabits (Mbits) per second compared to HDV’s 25 Mbits. Also, camcorders just don’t have the control over DOF and bokeh giving a flat typical video look which makes the 5D2/7D much more useful and interesting to work with. I would have bought the 5D2 just for photography had it not had the video ability, but thankfully it does, makes it that much more usefull. The revolution was a success!
If that question was to me, no I didn’t. Yet I’ve been making a living doing video production since the mid 1980’s, and still photography since the early 80’s. I’ve taught classes in both too. You don’t need a 3 year degree to learn any of it. You can learn more in six months assisting a good pro than you can in 3 years at a school imo.
Your’s and Peter’s arguments make no sense. I started working as a pro photographer in 1982, and in all that time I can’t think of a situation where a client simply added video because they liked my still work. They ask for examples of your video work, and if you suck at it, you will not get work. People who just shoot stills just shoots stills. It has nothing to do with those who shoot both. Some of us like shooting both. They offer different challenges and creative outlets. For those who have no talent in video production, it doesn’t mean you are a better photographer than someone who shoots video too. You people are way off base suggesting people can’t do both or you can’t be talented at both.
I am not opposed to video and I’m happy it is great for many people. Just as them, I want the best I can afford. If Canon sees things as you, then good for them, I’m sure they will lose photographers for videographers.
The main point is that as per marketing, design and history, this is a photographic camera, a camera designed for still pictures WITH a video capability.
If Canon now wants to switch and have Video cameras with still capability, then it’s all good; I (and many others) want to know the “revolution” in our main interest and get the best tool for our purpose.
Right now, with the 1D4 it’s the same, there are only videos around and no real life, low light pictures at ISO 6,400 or 12,800. It looks to be a Video Camera and not a still camera as used (and intended) to be.
Be honest, the video capabilities are good for someone with great knowledge in videography or the average Joe (as I am) to take a quick video for personal use; because to create something professional (or good enough), you need several accessories (starting from a powered good mic) which I won’t need, require nor willing to carry along my lenses.
So my point, easy, sorry, not a “revolution” in the still camera department, they gave me more pixels, a step up in technology (ISO) and nothing else. Revolutionary would be a better AF for low light, two or three stops better and real weather sealing.
I don’t know why you think Canon is going to lose photographers for videographers, they still make the best still DSLR’s.
As for the 1D4, most likely the reason there are not a lot of samples of still quality is Canon is probably still not done with the RAW conversion software, and they do not want moronic Nikon-loving reviewers trashinig the camera for not being sharp like some did with the 7D when they tested beta cameras with beta software. If Canon is smart, they will not allow any low light still samples until the proper RAW decoding can be done.
Then again, you can’t deny that their methods are totally wrong.
First, Canon used to have the best all around DSLR; in the latest years, low light and AF were (are) better in nikon FF (for some use, giving no more than 12 Mp are needed); in the zoom department, Nikon again surpass the old canons (expected due new technology, so we need to wait for canon updates). I do not cheer for any company, to me, it’s business. My relationship with Canon is simple, I pay for a product/service and they deliver it. Up to now, I don’t have anything bad to say about them, they’ve been very accommodating to my needs (up to the limit a business shall be) and I’ve been paying them. Now, since using more low light conditions, I’m using my 5D2 with the ST-E2 for proper and good focusing but I received some complains about the “red light” so I want something good for the task. I tried a D3 for a few minutes, and for that task, it was better (I’m not saying better camera, I’m saying better at that specific task). So, of course, being invested in Canon gear, I want a product that deliver the same.
Think global, I know, you can’t make everybody happy, but a company should try. What they are doing now, is breaking deeper the confidence in them; plus, many pros (not the big deal people, but the ones who make a living out of photography) are anxious because many have been waiting for this camera at this specific time to buy new gear and do what’s needed for taxes purposes; some, will have to buy something else and burn the money just to wait for the camera.
Second, if is right what you’re saying about the RAW converters, that breaks deeper the confidence, because they are releasing a camera without the proper preparation in advance. I don’t care the reason, but it points that they wanted to compete with Nikon, Why? If canon were really way better than Nikon, nobody would mind what Nikon or anybody else do. See that nobody make a big deal out of any other vendor’s releases.
Canon has DPP, they should have by now the right decoding. Are we to buy a 5 grand camera blindly out of faith? At least, I cannot do it. I’m more in the league of a hobbyist with some paying jobs, who had to work over time for two years to save the money for the “toy” without compromising my budget.
I see your point and I don’t criticize it, I embrace it with the understanding of your needs and requirements, perhaps you can see mine and other people circumstances/desires/needs.
I do deny “their methods are totally wrong.” No company is going to pelase everybody.
“they are releasing a camera without the proper preparation in advance”
The camera is not shipping yet, as in not yet released. I’m sure it will ship with the proper RAW decoding in DPP and firmware in the 1D4. The point is as of right now, only pre-production cameras are out in testing, so any criticism of it is premature, and it would be inappropriate to release RAW files at this stage.
looks great indeed, same like the 5d2, 7d, and all the other v-dslrs.
Ok David, please name me a Magnum photographer that is as equally well known for his or her video shooting as his or her stills, a few great names, Alex Webb, David Alan Harvey, Trent Parke – stills and stills only etc. I am assuming that above posters are making the point that some photographers use the video feature in 5D mark II’s and IDIV’s, especially those dealing with the general public, as a means to gain a client’s booking as they may be lacking somewhat in natural ability as a photographer. I.E. I can offer this, and this, and this, and this as long as you book me.
Jane,
I just stopped arguing; we will never see David eye to eye.
It is so funny and obvious that the point is missing. In my few paying gigs, the model wanted me because of the pictures; so thinking as simple as if she asked me for video…
Last time I checked, I had two arms only and needed both for photography, I would need two more for video. I know that people will jump saying that you can take stills when doing video… yes you can, it’s not really professional, but you can… you will never get different perspectives but you can… come on! I don’t think anybody would want that for their wedding or the such. I still believe that the video is for pros using only video or for home non artistic videos; but nothing in between.
Brilliant!!! Go Canon Go…You Rule in HDSLRs…
jfdpl86,
Agree 100%.
These guys that say they are stills & video in one. I can shoot video while do stills etc. Wow, they must be really putting some effort in composition and being creative with their stills while trying to juggle video and stills at the same time, lol, it’s a gimmick to book the general public, who just don’t know any better.
We all know the type, they type of photogs that will offer anything to potential clients to distract them fro the fact they are crap photographers with no eye whatsoever, which is very prevalent in the wedding industry unfortunately. It is like, ‘sure the photography is crap but look at my pretty studio, and pretty albums and i can do video as well as stills at the same time etc ‘
If you a good stills photographer you should be putting all your effort into your stills work and not trying to offer the world in order to out bid other photographers with ‘what i can give you’.
Steve,
Agreed. Thing is, there are different fields and some people doesn’t understand it. Being a great guitarist doesn’t make you a great dancer and both use music; even if you’re great at both, you can’t do it at the same time. Period, it’s a fact of life.
As photographers, one example is a wedding; video and still can’t go hand to hand. You can’t do both without compromising one. Too many megapixels have pamper us taking sloppy pictures and cropping in post, but sometimes is not the best route. A good photographer knows his trade and will try to get a great composition in field, so how can you move that fast taking the video?
Or if you’re doing video, how can you suddenly remove all the attached devices (used for a real good video) to take a weird position to get that great angle for the picture?
I respect people who does video and I’m glad they can use any of this cameras, and they should respect still photography as well. It’s not fighting, it’s simply different trades. And I’m sorry if I’m missing something, but despite this cameras has video, I still see all manufacturers saying “for professional photographers” while the camcorders, despite some having the capability to take stills are “for professional videographers”.
“As photographers, one example is a wedding; video and still can’t go hand to hand. You can’t do both without compromising one.”
To some ‘photographers” that means very little, as in the wedding industry the last thing some “photographers” care about is getting great and interesting photos in camera. Bigger albums, prettier studios, more technology without a single mention about the actual photography. Like wrapping a turd. Unfortunately alot of the general public get hoodwinked by it and fall for it.
We are exactly the same page. Just like the over reliance of photographers that DO NOT have an natural eye for a great photo, or for composition, or can sense a decisive moment take very average images in camera and work them in photoshop for 3 months to turn it into an illustration in order to “make it” an interesting photo.
They just offer more and more and more to deflect the fact they have no natural talent for a photo and need to use technology to book clients.
Get real, you won’t see HD DSLR’s replacing pro/prosumer camcorders anytime soon. It’s convenient to have it video/stills but if you really think Sony, Canon, JVC, and Panasonic have just given up their pro products because of the 7D, 5D II, and now 1D4 because they can do HD video significantly better, that’s just a dream.
Aside from aliasing issues, poor sound capture, and smarter focusing these cameras have a long ways to go.
http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/article.php/20