|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
First Spec List
This is the first spec list I have received about the 1Ds Mark IV.
The person that sent this in stressed the 1Ds Mark IV will not set the benchmark for video performance in the Canon lineup. It's felt the camera is too big for a lot of people. There will be a more video oriented full frame camera coming. The 1Ds Mark IV is a still camera first.
Specifications
-32mp CMOS (New Sensor Technology)
Noise control wasn't the primary goal of the sensor, dynamic range is.
-Dual DIGIC V
The new sensor requires a new processor, This will be the 2nd camera with DIGIC V.
-5 FPS
No increase in shooting speed.
-Video Features
Video will be about the same as the 1D Mark IV feature wise. There may be a couple of extra bells and whistles.
-Live View
Contrast detection AF will be the fastest yet on a Canon DSLR.
-Form Factor
The camera will be nearly the same shape as the 1D Mark IV. Do not expect any ergonomic upgrades
-Flash Master
There will be a built in flash master to work with a new Canon speedlite.
-Announcement in August
Expect this to receive a separate press announcement.
CR's Take
Canon is always very incremental with upgrades to the EOS-1's. A part of me cannot see the camera getting DIGIC V when the 1D has DIGIC IV.
I will agree that it will not be a flagship video camera.
I'd be surprised if it doesn't come with an improved version of the 7D electronic level.
This could be the beginning of the spec madness. Take it with a grain of salt.
cr
there’s no way it will have a pop-up flash, so how will it have a flash commander? could this be the beginning of Canikon using radio based flash systems? I sure hope so.
This will be the 2nd camera with DIGIC V.
WHAT IS THE FIRST WHIT D!GIC V ???????
May Be The 60D
or 1D Mark IVn
So is it going to have one of canon’s custom video codacs that Tim Smith was speaking of in his interview over at cinema5d.com? Sounds like canon is moving on from H.264.
First GL?
Probably the same way the Canon ST-E2 works: a small, near-infrared light source. They can build that into the body and use it as a focus-assist light, too.
Can’t see that happening unless the form factor changes. You need to set the infra-red light source pretty high above the lens mount to ensure you have no obstructions.
This sounds plausible.
– 32mp CMOS Sensor = Probably
– Dual DIGIC V = Doubt it, I see the 60D as the harbinger of the DIGIC V and the 1Ds4 as the last of the DIGIC IV cameras
– 5 FPS = yeah, 32mp * 5fps = 16mp * 10fps
– Video Feature Staying Constant = Probably
– Live View Faster – Quite possibly
– Form Factor Same as 1D4 – Probably
– Flash Master – highly doubt it
I thought the same thing but it’s too early for 1D mark IVn, you gotta wait at least 2 years for that to happen
urgh… why not 10fps in sRaw (8mp) ?!?
Time to suprise us Canon…! Stop doing the same thing over again…
In a little more than 2 years the MKV will be out.
I like this rumor more for what it suggests another camera might be. 5D3 could be the cinema flagship or possibly a 3D could take that role over. In any case that’s what I am looking forward to: a 5D3. Oh yeah, and a bunch of lenses. Come on Canon!
500 f/5.6 IS
24-70 f/2.8 IS
35 f/1.2
CR#s changed.
I noticed the CR# definitions recently changed. CR0 is now what CR1 used to be (sort of). CR0 used to be news item. Did previous reports get updated when the definitions were changed? If not, is there a history of what the designations meant at different times?
You’d still have to process 32mp of data to get the 8mp. That’s about 4.5Gb/s of throughput assuming 14 bits per pixel.
Then why the 5DII can do video in 1080p @ 30fps? Based on your theory, it still needs to compute 21mp of data @ 30fps then downscale right?
It doesnt make sense. Canon has the tech to get faster reading in lower resolution.
Possibly (but who knows for sure, since Canon do what they want in last term, and change firmware features on last moment) this very expensive camera will have a “clean” (no white square…) and Full HD video output through HDMI (while recording)
It will probably have the enough hardware resources to do it. That would allow to record the signal with external devices.
The white square is a joke, it’s extremely easy to “fix” even in lower level models (enable/disable function…)
Surely this camera will be 1st for stills photography, BUT regarding movie/video Canon will make it on par with the 1D Mark IV and even a bit more. But as always not as much as they could….
We are impressed with the potential these cameras have inside, REALLY amazing (the more you know about it, the more impressive it gets), but not fully exploited.
A bit bigger screen is also possible to come on this model.
BTW: for those interested on Move, Video or Filmmaking, check our Blog post to see a 5D Mk II disassembled and modded to support PL Mount lens:
http://5dmark2.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/modding-5d-mark-ii-pl-mount-1/
Amazing professional work.
CR0. “Dual DIGIC V
The new sensor requires a new processor, This will be the 2nd camera with DIGIC V.”
If the rumormonger is gonna claim that, at least be clever enough to also drop hints about the *first one* to have Digic5. He’s getting ahead of himself :P.
Rumour has it that Nikon will have 2K Video in the release of their next FF camera, the D4.
When will Canon have 2K video?
BS. They aren’t an electronics company. They are beholden to whatever Sony and other IC suppliers can give them.
Read my lips… There won’t be a 3D… ever!
“increased DR” is huge to me…much more than megapixels.
if this sensor can output 16bit , MF level DR images….I’ll be one happy camper. Especially at 5 fps!!
I always thought they were going to build in radio controls for flash due to international differences in radio transmissions? Complicating production of the camera? Although i would much prefer this to the crappy ST-E2, I would think a bold on device would be much easier to manufacture for difference countries.
“weren’t going to build in”
and to be fair, the ST-E2 isn’t really crappy…just very limiting in usefulness
You don’t, really. If I put my ST-E2 on my 50D and turn the camera to shoot a portrait shot, the light source is not higher than the lens mount but it still works. It just needs to be unobstructed. There are lots of cameras with AF-assist lamps in the body that are easy to keep unobstructed.
Of course, it doesn’t mean that they won’t do any of these:
1. Add a pop-up flash like the Nikon D700.
2. Use RF triggers and sell a new flash to match.
3. Use RF triggers and sell a new flash attachment for existing flashes used as slaves.
4. Mount the IR transmitter on a stalk that pops out of the camera from somewhere. It doesn’t have to be over the lens, as it is not lighting the subject.
5. NOT ADD A FLASH COMMANDER. If you can afford a 1Ds, you are unlikely to quibble over the cost of an ST-E2 or 580EX. The camera is so big that you’d hardly notice the extra bulk.
Good question.
Nikon has been SURPRISINGLY quiet for a long time…
So they must be working very hard to release something really special to compete with Canon in the Movie/Video field… (they already compete well on the photography field… no doubt)
Full HD is really a good resolution, capable to be upscaled to 2K without too much problems if the footage is good and a proper software is used. Of course native 2K is better. But some kind of storage method/Codec compression will need to be implemented accordingly.
We always proposed that the user had the chance to set the Codec compression levels. That is completely possible, but unfortunately not implemented.
In fact the most problematic current limitations are: Moire/Aliasing and Rolling Shutter issues.
For rolling shutter you can use software correction (“The Foundry” has a great option), but for Moire/Aliasing there is almost no choice.
IF Nikon “fixed” those two major problem, then… well Canon be aware! you will need to push the firmware features to the limit on the current DSLRs to compete, and even improve and fix hardware limitations on future models.
Indeed we are very firm about what Firmware Improvements can do. The potential on the current EOS 7D, 5D Mark II and 1D Mark IV is still AMAZING and not fully exploited (that could be a nice “hidden card” to use when Nikon arrives, but who knows..)
– Just to mention one feature very “easy” to do for Canon programmers: Rack Focus/Focus presets/Focus programming. A very useful function for filmmakers (even present on Canon video cameras).
Magic Lantern Project has already done it without knowing a piece of firmware source code…
Then how much more could Canon do? A LOT.
Given that the 5D2 is selling well, they’ll probably keep all the movie-making goodies for that model rather than have it trickle down to lesser models. On a Mark 3, I’d expect to see an articulating screen, proper pixel-binning, maybe 2K video, and maybe new motorized zoom lenses with wired or wireless control through the camera. Some sort of focus puller feature would probably float a few boats.
Films are not shot with 30+MP in portrait orientation, so the extra resolution and extra grip of a 1Ds would be wasted. Canon probably want to keep this as a “pure” stills camera, so I would not be surprised if it had no movie mode, or at most nothing more than what the 1D has, just to tick a few boxes.
two word solution. “Pocket wizards”
No, not this time, too bad. Lulz.
why so sure?
Sure, if you never bother to scan the other pixels. But that leaves a lot of information on the table; you can get much better signal/noise by binning pixels rather than simply discarding them. Severe subsampling is also what causes the aliasing issues in the video.
I’m not saying it’s the best solution but right now if sometimes you need 32mp, you need a second camera to do 10fps. It could be made in the same camera, with a compromise. Photography is all about compromise anyway.
Christian,
For sRAW, Canon combines data from all the pixels to generate a new file with fewer pixels. The new file has a greater depth per pixel but only 1/4 of the pixels.
For HD video, evidence suggests only every third row of pixels in the frame is used. The rest are simply ignored. Since the frame height is about 84% of the full frame, 1/3 of 84%, or only about 28% of the data is used for HD video.
> -32mp CMOS (New Sensor Technology)
> Noise control wasn’t the primary goal of the sensor, dynamic range is.
If they hadn’t have added an extra 11MP they might’ve had both.
Rumour has it that there’s always another rumour just around the corner!
There is room for another camera between the 5D and 1Ds. Plain and simple. Would Canon put one there? Who knows. Could Canon beef up the 5D spec for the 5D3 to essentially fill this space? Yes. Does it matter what it’s called? No.
Best rumor ever.
DR is the right direction with this camera. Noise is secondary if you ask me. Clean 3200, excellent 6400 and perfectly usable 12800 is all anyone should want.
We have a long way to go within the DSLR space in regards to dynamic range to reach medium format. A long way indeed. If we get close at 5fps and with the convenience and relative low price of a DSLR it’s a major victory for Canon.
Video should remain robust but not the primary technology.
How bout those spanking new lenses with new coatings, lower CAs, faster AF, and corner to corner improvements we know you are capable of giving us Canon to go with your massive 32mpx high DR camera?
135 1.8 L IS
85 1.2 L IS
50 1.2 L IS
35 1.2 L IS
I add the IS because it is an incredibly useful feature for video, not as fuel for the hate game.
Which is exactly what I would like to see in the next 1Ds. Most of the time you shoot 32mp but *if* you need 10fps, at least you have an option instead of buying a 1D and carrying 2 cameras along.
Yeah it’s all about dynamic range for me.
Better sort it our or I’m going MF Back.
Just because they aren’t an electronics company doesn’t mean they won’t have 2K video in their next FF camera.
If Sony have got that in the pipeline, then there’s no reason that Nikon won’t roll out with it.
Your argument about why Nikon won’t/can’t does not make any sense.
You mean the ones with a 30 ft rang on the 580 EX II?
But sir,
Canon seems to be doing the same thing every time – because it works.
If they adopted your solution, every pundit would severely slam Canon for the resulting horrible (predictable) aliasing issues (and I’m sure pros would stick to their 1D Mark IVs). It would be spun as a blow to Canon’s prestige and to their opinion of their customers to release a $8000 (just a rough guess on my part) body with the option to do 10fps…crippled by severe aliasing issues not present in images generated by far cheaper DSLRs. Bottom line – Canon is not going to turn back the clock on quality in a major shooting mode.
If compromise is, as you suggest, the name of the game, then why not buy a smaller second body? Or stick to the 1D Mark IV and the compromise of the lower resolution? In the first case the 1Ds IV becomes the “secondary” body used in situations where it may be set up properly to take advantage of its resolution – and the other body is the main one, ready for fleeting moments where 10fps is required. I can only try to imagine the sort of hellish environment where you have to move from medium format resolution to 10fps…billboard-sized stacked shots of football players maybe? 4K resolution equivalent flipbooks to be viewed cruising down a highway? It sounds like a photog’s version of biathlon.
Looking at just the 5fps spec, this latest camera certainly seems more suited for the studio and less for the action photography segment. I feel from the idea behind your comment that there’s a strain on the positioning of the 1Ds series becoming a hybrid studio and action camera (or at least some feel that way). But I think that in situations where you need 10fps, medium format-grade resolution is something you can keep another camera around for (and probably leave back at the studio or at least in the bag).
It’s been my idle observation that the MTF curves are significantly higher on the “slower” lenses than on the 1.2Ls, not just on the black (wide open) lines, but at the f8 blues as well. Those 1.2Ls are optimized for wide open, not for reasonable photography. But piggybacking on what you said, is there really all that much distance in ISO improvements towards being able to shoot f/4 L lenses at any time of day (or night)? Usable 25600 seems more than enough.
Definitely agree, though, that it’s time for DR – especially on the consumer DSLRs, but I’m cheap. :)
XF Codec, perhaps?
Exactly.
Video uses line skipping.
@ed
I always thought the f/8 mtfs on the 1.2s were really quite impressive. In any case I’d be perfectly happy with 1.4 refreshes if it translated to excellnt performNce throughout the aperture range.
How about a “QUAD” Digic IV Processors instead of dual Digic Vs ?? :p
Agreed. I really don’t understand the clamor for 35mm 1.2 or 135mm 1.8. Put the engineering into improving performance at the apertures which are by far more often used in day to day photography.
Drop the 85mm to 1.4 and maybe it will finally handle better than the average shot put.
F/1.2 brings much more benefit to Canon in terms of bragging rights that it does to photographers in taking good pictures.
Lol, the “war of computer cores” exported to the DSLRs world…
Hopefully, if that ever happens, they won’t need fan coolers ;)
There is more to a large aperture than just a “brighter image” given that exposure and ISO are set to the same value.
A larger aperture also gives you a shallower depth of field.
I never erall noticed it on my 400D – but started to play a bit with it on my 5D MK II where is easier to get – and much more noticeable and better too.
Only problem for me is – my largest aperture lense is the 50mm f1.8 II – I’d really need a better lense – but haven’t got the money for it.
Actually, that would be a pretty good idea – maybe even split the image into 4 “sectors” – it might increase file sizes for JPEG a bit but then you could move the processors to different spaces in the camera body – which would allow for efficient cooling.
Patent that idea and sell it to Canon ;) – it should be quite doable – especially in RAW.
Or alternatively – procesor 1 get’s first image, processor 2 second and so on…
What might become a limit is the CF card write speed… or buffer – but buffer – add a spare backup battery – give the cameras a smallish internal SSD for ermergency bbuffer dumps and that would be sorted…
On a 1Ds surely that could be implemented with a fair profit margin.
The 32MP rumour with improved dynamic range sounds a bit implausible to me – especially if it is different sensor technology.
While in terms of pixel density 32MP on FF will be well below an 18MP APS-C sized sensor, I somehow can’t feel Canon would throw two larger upgrades into one sensor – especially with a statement like “noise control wasn’t a focus”.
A lot of people go whinging about how Nikons are so much better at low ISO and have so little noise…
Well, I find my 5D MK II absolutely fine on ISO 3200 – and for small images very useable at 6400 – no complaints from me :) (BUT: I’m not printing)
Considering that – I couldn’t imagine Canon increasing the pixel count without keeping ISO noise at least at the MK II level – dynamic range has been upgraded in the past too – so that’s not implausible in small steps.
However – throwing these thing together seems a bit far fetched to me.
On that ntoe – I could be proven wrong though… time will tell.
Whatever happens – I won’t afford a 1Ds anyway… (and the only thing I personally could benefit from is weather sealing – else the 5D MK II “my level”)
2K video is basically 2048×1080. 1920×1080 is not far off from that.
The 1Ds line is competing with the lower-end of the MFDB range. The medium format cameras have great DR but not just great high ISO either.
If we take the rumor as stated as true, then I believe what the guy actually saying is that ISO will be at current 5D2 levels and not reach the sky high levels present in the D3s.
Hi,
May be it’ll come with a CCD sensor… notice CCD sensor start appearing back to canon product.
The EF 85mm f/1.8 is for you, then. It’s affordable (if you can afford a 5D2) and close to an “L” in quality. Lots of my favourite shots were taken with that lens (on APS-C, though, where it’s about 135mm equivalent). The depth of field is not going to be much different from the nifty-fifty, but the image quality and build quality sure are.
Why?
I could be wrong, but I think the CCD sensors require a different fabrication process than the CMOS sensors. Unless Canon is buying them in (from someone like Kodak), a separate process would be far too expensive. It targets a small market, so there would not be enough demand to justify a new in-house fabrication process.
The 1Ds is their flagship model. They would not want to declare that its most important component is not made by Canon. The CCD sensors they use in their compact models are rumoured to be made by Sony. They only make the CMOS sensors themselves.
They’re not an IC company, but they do have nice ties to them. I wouldn’t be surprised if they struck a deal so they’d get some fresh tech, or help them design it. 2K vid is nothing without the sensors :)
it’d also increase power reqs, make the body harder to design (stuffing 4 processors in with all the required wiring), and as said, the writing speed becomes the problem, so you’d need a huge buffer for that, too. And no, quad CF cards sounds like a bad idea to me (though it’d be nice).
If you really want such a shutter speed, you might be better off developing a whole new camera, with DIGIC V instead.
Indeed.
As noted above, the two major problems are Moire/Aliasing and Rolling shutter issues.
If Nikon comes with a solution that minimizes them a lot (not likely to be completely eliminated in a Hybrid camera), then it will be very interesting to see what Canon does.
Canon’s Full HD solution is so far the best option on HDSLR, but these things don’t last forever…
What can get one very upset is to know and see the BIG potential the camera (5D Mk II, 7D, 1D Mk IV, etc) has inside and the manufacturer doesn’t give it to the customers…
Canon could provide LOT more flexibility to current DSLR with Full HD capability.
The codec compression level could be set by the user, the focus could be programmed, the white square could be disabled if wanted to allow Full HD recording via HDMI (at least when not recording video with the camera), Audio meters could be displayed on real time and so on…
Not to mention some improvements for Photography: more frames for Bracketing mode (3 frames in a $2,500 body-only camera is a joke!) and AutoISO limiters…
We hope Nikon come with a big thing, and Canon get smart and release improvements for current cameras.
That’s an intelligent way of competing with minimal costs.
No word on the EF-S 15-70 f/4 IS USM yet?
PW is addressing the range issue on with the 580EX II with different RF shields. There’s a new one coming that doubles as a stand/umbrella mount that looks really sweet.
Word is it turned out to be a 15-85mm.
Canon might come up with moire reduction, time coding, and all the other pro features in an EF (or maybe an EF-V mount for specialty lenses with power zoom and power focus that can also take EF lenses) mount camera, but it will be priced at 1Ds-level if not higher.
They are going after the RedOne/Scarlet market with such a camera, not the $2500 DSLR market.
I don’t know about that, especially since that Nikon didn’t really mind that the 24mpx chip in the D3x is manufactured by Sony (albeit to Nikon specifications).
Kodak has no FF 36x24mm CCD sensor listed as a product at present though.
I’m right with you on this D.C.M, the 5D Mk II is great for me, the “noise” looks more like film to me, especially at ISO’s 1600-3200. I can even use it at these ISO’s in a normal shoot to replicate it, I think it looks quite good honestly.
I am hoping Canon will just stay with the 21 MP density and work on the things that really matter like contrast, saturation, pixel sharpness, ect. One thing I would really want would be better Dynamic Range, although the 1Ds Mk II is great to me with 9 stops, that’s more than enough and makes for amazing images for sure.
Yes as of right now Nikon has better ISO handling at higher levels but I know I will sound like a fanboy but I like the “grain” of Canons sensors. It is a lot easier to adjust for if it gets too out of hand, color noise I like a lot better, must easier to get rid of I think. Plus the image does not lose as much detail as luminance noise. Plus I don’t care what company it is, I know I would never use over ISO 25,000, even 12,000 is enough. This “ISO pissing contest” is just getting to be too much. How about working on ISO’s that we will use in everyday settings, so ISO 50-25000 or so. Yes Nikon came out with their +100,000 ISO before Canon, we all know each company knew of each others plans, Nikon just has a FF and Canon ASP-H sensors, of course Nikon will be better. I think if they keep this race up and Canon keeps the pixel count small (please) then Canon will have better ISO numbers, and hopefully better ISO numbers in the lower sensitivities.
Printing is another thing, I don’t think enough photographers these days do it, they all keep it digital for some reason, but to really see how a camera performs it needs to be printed for sure, screen resolution is much worse than what print can be made to be (72 dpi vs. 300 dpi). Too many pixel peepers out there looking at the results on a screen rather than on a quality print I think.
Oh and last thing I agree with you better weather sealing, better autofocus, and more dynamic range from the 5D Mk III, and I would never buy another camera.
Indeed the rumor of a sensor with “different technology” is very plausible and interesting at the same time.
To improve noise levels and dynamic range, the sensor technology must be improved (in fact it has been along lasts years).
32MP is in fact an old rumor, so it’s nothing new. But to get Full HD the camera should skip more than 3 lines, or hopefully use a different (and better) method to deliver the final 1920×1080 footage.
If that works fine, minimizing to the limit the aliasing artifacts/issues, then THAT “could” be a very important feature for those filmmakers who want to use HDSLR instead of much more expensive cameras for production.
If Canon somehow improves the pixel binding method to get a Full HD output (or 2K), that would be very interesting.
A dual Digic (V?) could be able of such performance.
Exactly. The technology is out there but just like any other business you can’t put all your apples in one basket if you will.
I would be fine with a sensor with 16 MP, just take the 1Ds Mk II sensor and work on it a lot, that sensor was amazing to me. Work on the software, and some hardware with like you said dual Digic V, and it would be a killer machine. Maybe even the same fps of the Mk IV, which is not to shabby to me.
An optimized 16MP sensor has enough resolution for me, and then work on the algorithms for noise, color, ect. That would be perfect to me.
Video for me is not as needed, but is a cool feature to have, 2K would be awesome to have, but just work on the HD 1080, like you said earlier, Firmware, firmware, firmware. The technology is there but Canon is holding back. Sort of like buying a Porsche and never taking it to the track, it makes no sense.
Yeah, and they take 1fps!
Get real, the 1Ds doesn’t compete there. It has a justifiable presence, but it has a smaller sensor, it’s more flexible but lower res.
Ye but that is not a constant f/4 we need a crop version of the 24-105mm.
What about the Pentax 645? I can see the 1Ds Mark IV competing with that and similar systems. The costs for MFDB are coming down as well.
FYI, Leica M9 using FF CCD from Kodak, a very expensive rangefinder camera with very expensive prime lenses
Let’s look at the primary purpose for the 1Ds series: A relatively light-weight, relatively less expensive alternative to MF for non-sports pros. Given the existance of the 1D series, why would the 1Ds need higher sensitivities or frames per second? Pros use MF for dynamic range and resolution; but, as mentioned earlier, they’re heavy, slow and expensive; as well as having fewer lens options.
So what would a commercial photographer want a DSLR for? On-location shooting under time constraints, where high repro quality is needed. Translation: High DR; high resolution; high reliability. Don’t worry about frames per second: 5 is more than enough. Don’t worry about ISO: 600 is fine. Forget video: If a pro wants video, he/she will use pro video gear.
Now, if only there was an effective way to build in a lightweight, fold-away magnifying viewer and color-balancing controls: Imagine the after-capture timesavings!