The latest on the next 1Ds
I’ve received spots of info about the 1Ds over the last month or so. Some good stuff and some silly stuff (square sensor).
Release Date?
I’ve received a few dates, but the last one stated the 1st half of April 2010. The release would coincide with the new firmware for the 5D Mark II.
Specs?
The specs are basically the 1D Mark IV with a 32mp sensor and a much slower framerate. There has been no mention of any new 1Ds only features outside of the sensor.
Could there be some advances in the movie mode? I could definitely see that being a possibility. The movie feature of digital SLR’s (especially from Canon) has been great for sales.
Price
Expect a price tag of $8499 USD.
Camera Testing?
No third party currently has a 1Ds Mark IV. They should make their way into selected pro hands sometime in the next couple of months.
Photokina in September?
This camera could be released for Photokina. This was the original timeframe for the 1Ds4.
cr
|
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
does that mean the 5D II firmware comes in April?
That’s the rumor.
A price tag of $8499 USD huh? I would need to sell my car…
you’ve got such a cheap car ?
:-)
For mine I’d get a set of tires for this price :-)
(ironic off)
That’s the premium level price tag for being among the 1st to play with this beast.
Would make sense IMHO – + 25 % in linear resolution from some 80 to a 100 lp/mm (rounded) – very nice option for a 5D III in two years – if the ISO performance is kept or enhanced I’d buy a 5D III with 7000 x 4667 Pixel resolution for 1/3 of the 1Ds IV price in the 2nd round of product offering for the mid price range. 4 fps and less PRO feeling are good enough for what I intend to do with a 5D II successor :-)
(even the AF could stay the same since I mainly use the TS-E lenses)
I realize the square sensor sounds silly to some, but honestly, this is the one thing that would make me consider spending $8000+ on a camera. As a wedding photographer, a square sensor would eliminate the need for a flash bracket which would significantly reduce the weight of my rig, not to mention giving me more cropping options when building the wedding album. Yes, I realize there are medium format square sensor options, but they are even more expensive and just not as responsive as the current top-of-the-line DSLRs.
now I am really disappointed!
Let’s hope they can get it out of the way ASAP so they get started on the 5D Mark III. Obviously, at $8500, very few can actually get to own such a toy, for the rest of us, the 5D Mark III will be the first encounter with such a sensor. Here to hoping it won’t be long coming, and while at it, maybe they can fix that mediocre AF, perhaps borrow the 7D AF.
Hope to be, not more than 32mp, but $8500 is too much… That will be 8000 Euro in Europe…
for gods sakes canon…not another MP increase. Are they trying to screw themselves over even more…
They need to do what they did with the G11 to G10, take the MP down. going from 21mp to say 12-16mp on a FF would be nice.
I would be shocked if it’s only $8499. Honestly I’d be suggesting $8999 to $9499. Also it will not be similar to the 1D Mark IV.
The problem with Canon is they base all their marketing hype on megapixels. There is no serious need to increase from 21 megapixels. What are they trying to compete with medium format cameras?
I think that $8499 price tag is a pipe dream. You are seriously looking in the $8999 to $9499 range. Maybe nobody has been paying attention but for the most part it seems both Nikon and Canon keep releasing cameras at a higher price point rather than being nice to the consumer.
Either way I wouldn’t buy the 1Ds Mark IV or even the eventual Nikon D4x since there is no need for a camera with 32 megapixels unless your doing medium format type stuff and even then it’s just a little silly.
I don’t think many people realize but you need a hell of a computer to be editing files of that size in the first place.
I think the 32 mpx increase will be appropriate so long as the new lenses coming out (they are coming out, right, Canon?) can match or outresolve the sensor. Too many of Canon’s L lenses now do not take full advantage of the sensor technology at 21mpx.
Furthermore the suggestion from Wedding Snapper above about a square sensor makes a lot of sense. From there photogs could select their preferred aspect ratio with dynamic in-camera cropping, or leave it alone for a post processing.
Also what part of this rumor is CR2? The whole thing? I only ask because there is a lot of information in here. Anyway, thanks CR Guy for the new info!
I want an octagonal sensor so that I can crop diagonally. That would be so cool.
The feature that should set the 1Ds4 apart from the 1D4 should be low noise shooting at high ISO. Plain and simple.
We’re seeing the preliminary results from the 1D4 now and they look like a stop to 2 better than the 1D3 which is not necessarily known for its superlative high ISO low noise settings; this functionality has always been the territory of the full frame sensors (1Ds3 and 5D2). So for my money, Canon should be thinking along the lines of the ‘Lord of “All” Darkness’ for this next generation machine. I think Canon could really pick up some sales if they advanced the video technology in the camera and considered some of the layout adjustments (buttons, menus) as they did on the 7D.
Anyway, as I said in my post above. Canon needs the lenses to make these bodies compelling. They have some. They need more.
Yes.
I bet the 5D Mark II will still over shadow this camera. Canon is going to regret ever releasing that 5D Mark II as it will always mean lower sales figures as you have a huge number of Canon Fans that thing MP are everything and who wants to pay more when the 5D Mark II is so cheap.
If the AF points are not tuned for a FF camera it will always be a mediocore AF.
I agree with that for the 5D/3D series to come.
These are the camera’s that don’t need high FPS, but will need to have increased ISO performance.
As for the 1Ds this camera is mainly used in studio environments where ISO performance is not such a big thing. Here Canon could pump up the MP. Problem with going to more MP is getting more noise as well :(
I am afraid so, yes….
This is the exact reason why Nikon seems to be doing well.
Canon’s marketing department is being runned by some Japanese who don’t understand the worlds needs.
I have been working for Sony’s Digital Imaging department and they had the exact same problem. They think they have all of the knowledge whereas they don’t understand the needs of its consumers.
Do you honestly think that photographers are waiting for ‘more’ video functionality? I don’t believe this myth at all. Sure for videographers the video option is a wonderfull thing.
But how on earth can a photographer make AND a good film AND good images at the SAME time? It just can’t be done… therefore for me video is just a gadget.
Why would you be disappointed, Canon stated they would ship the updated firmware by Summer 2010, so Canon is ahead of schedule.
The good news is this makes room for a 5D3 Fall 2010.
haven’t you learned….
Canon = always more MP…..
If you don’t want more MP, wait for the Nikon D800 with a 18mp FF sensor, 7fps, fantastic high ISO, Summer 2010.
Yea I know, i’ve given up on canon. Nikon is so much better and the future of canon looks dull given they keep adding mp.
This is not because of the 5D2, this is because Canon decided that the 1D4 is a 1.3 crop. I’ll bet that if Canon had decided to put in a 18MP FF sensor in the 1D4 it would have been a complete hit and many, many 5D and 5D2 owners would switch to 1D. 1Ds is just too expensive for most of us.
Why not just go for a 3d sensor while we’re at it, so I can crop behind me.
“No third party currently has a 1Ds Mark IV. They should make their way into selected pro hands sometime in the next couple of months.”
Actually Philip Bloom has had a 1D Mark IV for a little while now. He has a few videos up on his site.
Nevermind, I misread the original post.
I’m with GT here. There are very few photographers who are using video features, but the majority don’t care about the video. Video is just a gadget.
I think nikon is taking the right approach by having the video just for taking casual clips and focusing more on image quality and having a FF camera with great performance all around.
Taking Canon back to 18MP on a FF sensor really won’t happen.
More resolution doesn’t mean necessarily bad image quality.
More resolution is always useful. If they can keep noise under certain levels, that is a great achievement.
Who needs more resolution? Lot of people, despite many other’s opinion who doesn’t need it.
Aside that, not everything that Nikon does is good or better than Canon.
Nikon has lately shown some kind of “slow” development, or at least they were releasing cameras that were clearly designed in a somewhat “old” roadmap. Surely they have changed and updated it now, but that will show the results/effects somewhere in future.
Nikon also wants to compete with medium format.
Don’t forget the Nikon D3x and its brochure/marketing statements…
This is nothing new indeed.
But Canon has the potential and technology to compete with other types of cameras that Nikon still can’t… RED, yes.
Maybe you don’t know that:
– Canon showed the 5D Mark II at NAB 2009 (which is an event 100% aimed for video)
– Canon got unexpected success with Full HD capability on the 5D2, that reflected on MUCH more sales too.
– Filmmakers are not an island on the ocean… they are a huge community also expecting to see filmmaking improvements on Canon DSLR.
Just take a look at non “only-stills” forums, and you will realize how MUCH the video function is being used, and how huge potential it has from a business perspective.
Most “stills-only” photographers tend to think the video is a gadget. VERY, VERY FAR FROM REALITY…
With all the respect they deserve, those people still didn’t understand what happened (since the frustrating D90’s video, and the success of 5D Mark II) and what IS going on now…
What we call “video feature” is much more accurately named as “Cinematography” feature, because there are lot of differences between what we use to call “video” and cinematography.
Since 2010 all Nikon and Canon DSLRs will have video (would be more accurately named “Movie” or “Filmmaker”) function.
5D Mark II TEAM…
More resolution on the same size sensor always means dynamic range and worse image quality compared to less megapixels on the same sized sensor. Canon can improve their technology all they want, but they can never have the noise level of a sensor like nikon that is FF and 12MP. Canon cannot defy physics. Pixels that are physically bigger are always more sensitive to light and no amount of technology is going to make up for it, it can help to some extent but the image quality and noise level will never be like it would if they cut the MP down by half on the same sized sensor and keep the same technology.
More resolution is NOT useful to MOST photographers. I’m primarily an event/wedding photographer, 12 mp is more than enough for my needs. More resolution is only useful to landscape and maybe studio photographers who are in controlled environments. Seems like canon is making all cameras for just those people.
And sorry to say this, nikon does everything better than canon except for video and perhaps their selection of primes. Nikon was slow before, but once their full frames were released nikon took a giant leap forward and it appears as nikon will stay ahead while canon just keeps cramming more pixels on to their sensor.
Anyone up for sending masses of emails to canon to get them to stop with the MP race??
Yes nikon has the D3X with high MP, but they also have a FF with low MP and great high iso performance. Canon has nothing like the d700, D3, and nothing even close to the D3s. Canon does not have a FF that is fast with low mp, they are making all their FF cameras high MP whereas nikon has a medium format like camera while also having pro full frame cameras for event/wedding/sports photographers.
Sure canon can compete with RED, but again i’m talking about from a photographers perspective…I’ve never shot a video in my life and nor do I care for it. Who wants to set up a rig to shoot videos, if you’re a dedicated videographer than sure go with canon. But this is speaking from a photographers perspective like I’ve said many times. You can’t take both videos and photos at events/weddings.
So if you’re a photographer, Nikon is your only option left now if you want the best.
Videographer, go for canon or RED if you can afford it. I guess canon is gonna lose it’s place among photographers soon enough, and we can see evidence for that already. Just look at the stocks for canon on google, and look at nikons. Also, many pro photographers I know are switching to nikon (if you want links, i can give you many blogs of pro wedding photographers who are frustrated with canon and have switched).
All dslrs will have video, but I disagree with you. Most stills photographers DO THINK video is a gadget only. Only some are exploring videography as an option. For the stills only photographers canon has lost it, they’re just another pentax or olympus now.
See my other reply above.
Canon is doing great among those who make films…but I have no idea why canon wants to lose it’s place among photographers…
GT is right.
What canon needs to save them is a 3d of some sort, a FF with 12-18mp with EXCELLENT high iso performance that rivals or exceeds that of the D3S. They need to put their pro AF in it like nikon puts their pro AF in their d700 level cameras. That is the only hope canon has left, and if something like that doesn’t happen I predict anyone who can make the switch and knows the technicalities behind what makes for good IQ will switch to nikon.
Even the 5d mk ii has so many issues, there are 100s of people online complaining about the AF. I just visited the flickr group of 5d mark ii….a group that loves that camera supposedly, and all I found was people complaining about how the AF sucks on it.
Everyone with their D700 or D3 just loves it, it plain works and you won’t find anyone complaining about anything on them.
It’s silly because lenses and physical limitations of the body prevents using a square sensor.
New Firmware for 5D Mark II will be released on January.
the only medium format square sensor option (with CF card capture, not chained to an image bank or computer at least) is Hasselblad, and both the 16mp an 39mp backs are 1.5 crop in square format. THere is an open market for a square sensor camera with no legitimate competitors. THat would be the best thing Canon has done since the release of the 1D Mark II series…
Canon is not loosing still photographers that switch to pentax or olympus. Those brands, with all respect, are no competition to Canon in lot of still features and specs. Nikon can, though.
But lot of Nikon users has also switched to Canon. That might happen anytime, due MANY reasons and specific situations.
I do know most “stills only” photographers think the video is a “gadget”, I meant that, but THAT is the mistake.
Sorry, but I disagree with you.
5D Mark II is a great camera for portraits and weddings. Nikon doesn’t have anything similar on stills nor video features.
And surely you won’t do both (stills + video) tasks “at the same time” (although you can take a picture while recording video, loosing just few frames on the footage), but you can do one of them with the same camera and lenses. And that’s a great deal.
I agree that 1D Mark IV being 1.3x crop sensor is not like the D3s, but they are not SO much different in results related to photography, BUT very different in video/movie capabilities (Canon far ahead). Although you will miss the 1:1 focal length though, yes.
Dial it back to MRAW (probably 21.1 MP).
Nikon isn’t on the megapixel bandwagon? What about the D3x?
I want a full-frame camera with 25 megapixels, Full HD, ISO [standard] 100-51,200, High Settings H1 (102,400), H2 (204,800), and H3 (409,600); Low Settings L1 (50), L2, L3 (12.5), and L+ (1); 15fps for unlimited JPEG and 225 RAW; Dual SDXC and Dual CF card slots (4 slots in all); 45 AF points, cross-type to f/5.6!
I’d pay up to $15,000 USD for that!
Please, Canon, please!
A camera MP count will always go up for the same reason a car’s engine horsepower can only go up. Does anyone really need a 412 HP in a car, well the new Mustang GT has it and it’ll sell for that exact reason.
I totally agree with all you said, I own a D700 and I’m totally in awe at how well this camera does everything it’s supposed to, from low-light exposure to fast-moving subjects, the D700 got it all.
I agree a 3D would make a lot of sense right now and there are plenty of rumors. I do think Canon users are tired of advanced auto-focus being a super premium feature of only the top 2 cameras. And well, Canon listened and gave people a 7D. But that camera doesn’t meet the criteria for IQ many of us have. Thus we wait for a camera that can do it all for a price that isn’t out of reach for all but .1%.
It will come (see 3D rumor tonight), eventually.
silly???? Squared sensor would be THE most amazing thing ever!!!
A dream coming true.
Canon could do it.
Physical limitations of the camera body wouldn’t seem to apply to a camera body we’ve never seen before, am I missing something.
Is it true that existing lenses don’t have a round usable image circle?
“More resolution on the same size sensor always means dynamic range and worse image quality compared to less megapixels on the same sized sensor”
That’s completely WRONG. If that was true, we would still have less than 10 MP in many sensor sizes even with low dynamic range.
The sensor size and low resolution itself doesn’t guarantee better image quality.
Sensors’ technology have been developed and enhanced a lot along the last decade, if they weren’t, a full frame sensor with 21MP of resolution would deliver mostly noise…
If you say “Given a SPECIFIC sensor size AND technology, less resolution -meaning bigger photosites- could give us better image quality and less noise”, then that’s right indeed.
And sorry, but Nikon doesn’t make “everything” better, even considering D3/D3x. Although I agree that Nikon has many strong points on stills (Canon is miles ahead on video). I personally use Nikon and Canon, both brands have strong and weak points, especially considering the whole thing: camera + lenses (because the camera alone can’t do anything)
Nikon more or less is also on the MP race. It’s a marketing matter they can’t avoid.
And both companies want to compete somehow with medium format cameras. Nikon D3x and its marketing stuff was a clear demonstration.
Canon could be addressing the lens not being made for a square sensor right now with their updates.
“EXCELLENT high iso performance”
no problem as long as low ISO quality is not sacrificed or neglected.
“as long as they keep noise under certain levels”
that’s the problem, Canon is keeping noise at certain levels
so they can in increase Megapixels.
I’d rather have less noise.
It’s also wrong for the same sensor size and technology. Scale down the higher res image and you have the same low-noise image (within certain limits; banding might show up earlier with the smaller pixels).
It depends how big the square sensor is. I think we’ve had this discussion before, but if the sensor were something like (ballpark don’t crucify me) 30mm x 30mm most lenses would be able to cover that spec.
Thanks, that totally makes sense, and I see something I had missed.
It’s not that the image circle isn’t a circle, it’s that you can’t inscribe a 36×36 mm square in it even if you can inscribe a 36x24mm square in it. I ran the math on that, I’d expect a sensor just the tiniest bit over 30mm (I think I got something like 30.6mm), which matches your memory, and yeah, it totally makes sense.
The tilt-shift lenses produce significantly bigger image circles and could cover bigger sensors today, but … yeah. Thanks!
+1000
Exactly.
I’m a still photographer who used to think the focus on video features was stupid. But as 5D Mark II team pointed out, the success of full HD on the low noise 5DII has dramatically pushed up sales. I know plenty of people working with video that want to buy one now, because the quality is excellent and the lens selection is perfect. Moreover, for video people all these cameras and lenses are extremely cheap in comparison to their normal gear. I have a meeting with a friend who makes films in a couple of days to discuss with him the camera and lenses his studio should acquire to shoot ENTIRE FILMS on a dSLR. When I was in NY, I met a woman whose director wanted to switch to 5D IIs for their television work. Canon is making a lot of money on that feature. It’s true most still photographers don’t care and don’t use it, but the film people will continue to finance more research by Canon on this front. It’s going to get a lot bigger in the next few years. I totally agree though, that some 32 MP sensor with no to little improvement on noise is way worse a decision than an improved 21 MP sensor that shoots in the dark relatively cleanly.
i am a professional sports photographer, i also cover magazine celebrity events and wedding…
i am using a 5d mark II..honestly..yes i am happy with the performance of it…but…i hope they did not put video on it..instead…increased the frames per second…
everyone is right about canon..and they are losing photographers …. most pro i know have switched to nikon….i did not choose to switch to nikon yet since i still have complete lens lineup… but what could make me decide to switch …hey canon…..let me ask you this…why up to now, there is no camera that you have produced that can shoot sports with a Full Frame sensor? huh?… 7d is not full frame…1d Mark IV is not full frame…1Ds has slow fps…it cannot shoot sports…
why up to now there hasn’t any?
Nikon has D3, D3s….
and i dont need your 32 megapixels ..please!!!! and neither do we want to spend $8499 for a slow FF camera …….what we need are faster fps, good image quality at high iso low light performance and good AF……we do not print billboards here..most of us dont…
please listen to the consumers….consumers are those who use cameras…photographers, semi pros, hobbyists and professionals.. what we need is what u should satisfy….
that is why most have switched and most are switching to nikon now….it is because you cannot up to now, satisfy the needs of the consumers….
please canon please… wake up!
Resolution is over rated. With modern resolution standards; noise levels, dynamic range and pixel clarity matter more. I would love to see a lower resolution camera that had exceptionally good noise levels at high ISO. I shoot professionally, and my 11mp files(1ds) made amazing posters at 2′ by3′. My 1ds mark 2 is higher detail, but its image is better for other reasons.
As much as nobody needs 412 hp in a car, some of us love it. The same goes with a camera. I am supremily satisfied with my 16.7 mp 1ds mark 2, but I can’t wait to see It’s successor. Honestly I think my current camera could work for me for another 5 or 10 years, but I will replace it before then.
I think a professional camera having the ability to take a picture mid video is pretty useless. I’m speaking from a professional use perspective only.