The 1Ds Mark IV is probable for Photokina 2010 at the present. I have also heard springtime.
32mp Full Frame (I have also heard 38mp)
Dual DIGIC IV (no one is making a peep about DIGIC V)
New Video Features (Natural evolution)
ISO Range 100-6400 (no word on boost)
Same AF System as 1D4
Same body as 1D4
Nothing extraordinary here. Although, the sensor spec of 32mp comes from a pretty reliable source.
I shot Blads for most of my 30 years in commercial photography. I’ll have to confess to doing the math on a Hasselblad digital system every once in a while, but each time it makes less sense. Duplicating my analog Blad systems would cost $100K then, as a Pro, you need to have redundancy so another 100K for back ups. I regularly produce outstanding 60″ display prints with my 1Ds MKIII bodies and I’m sure the IV series cameras will only improve on what I get currently. I could be wrong, but I have serious doubts about the viability of companies like Hasselblad. How many $100,000 camera buyers are there out there? Pricing, combined with reliability issues, really makes Canon’s top of the line equipment very attractive.
I think i have spotted the 1Ds MK IV at the Australian Tennis Open being tested by a staff photographer.
All this conversation can be done with this note:
Shoot with whatever makes you happy and whatever makes you money. It’s nice to have money to spend in medium format cameras and who does not like that is because is a hater. Canon cameras are doing the job very fine. But nothing like the resolution and sharpness of a medium format.
Canon Mark III 1ds owner and Hassel owner
I would disagree with “the more pixels the better” comment. The more pixels the smaller the sensor and the smaller the sensor the more noise susceptabillity. Why do you need so many pixels? Or if you’re going to blow something up that large you mid as well stitch multiple shots together.