Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Talk [CR1]

[pedro]

I will use my 5DIII (purchased August 2012) as long as it's "clicking". Within the next years I will stay tuned to what either Canon comes out with or...I'll go for an A7sII and a Rokinon 14 F/2.8 for my astrostuff. I was quite happy about the recent Sony announcement. An updated mirrorless high ISO beast like the A7 R II which allows 500 K exposures might easily outlive my life expectation I am 51 now. As my 5DIII is at about 31K shutter actuations by the moment after 2 years and 10 months...

And yes, as stated by others in this thread: ISO will be the thing of the year, in upcoming FF DSLR or mirrorless announcements. Sony set the mark as far as we could see. We surely have to wait for the RAWs. But if so, this is Canon's challenge at the medium price level for FF bodies. Or will they leave increased ISO range and IQ to the 1DX bodies only?

 

[pvalpha]

I hope all future EOS bodies will omit the optical low pass filter like the 36.3MP D810, 24.2MP D7200, 24.2MP D5500 and 24.2MP D3300.

What about moiré? At this point, I'm not sure I'd buy a prosumer camera that didn't have an OLDP if I had a choice, the marginal sharpness is not worth it. For a studio or landscape specialist I could understand, but for a generalist (i.e. consumer) camera it's not warranted.

I personally would like the low pass delete as an option as an amateur. 4K is less important because somehow I think the one thing that won't go away is rolling shutter in the DSLR bodies. I'd rather have a 1080p without rolling shutter than 4k with it - as an amateur, of course. I have Photoshop (and several other applications) and I know how to use them. Moire can be corrected... rolling shutter... not so much and not so easily. The one shot out of a thousand that has moire would not be too onerous.

Considering that with the high resolution sensors in the pike moire shouldn't be a major problem anyway. Its line-resolution interference that causes it. And the sensors are approaching the resolving power of the glass. They switch to BSI, and they can push it past the resolving power of most consumer grade glass (even higher end stuff) anyway without significantly reducing photoreceptor sites and there's your low pass simply because the glass will low-pass for you. Of course, some things will always moire - even to the human eye.

What would be interesting is cameras based on CFast and UHS-II. With higher MP counts, you need the transfer rates, otherwise you'll have to cap ISO and FPS. Lets not even begin harping on 4k video... like I said above, rolling shutter isn't going to go away, but to even hope to capture good video without significant compression you need faster cards. CFast is SATA - where as CF is IDE. I think its time for an update there and it will help reduce the cost of CFast by bringing it into the pro-sumer realm. UHS-II should be easy as punch anyway because that's going to be the next thing to hit the standards for laptop slots with USB 3.1. 2016 laptops are likely to all be UHS-II based if they have a media slot, simply because m.2 is there for ssds, transfer is done with USB 3/3.1, and the cards are starting to hit the market. In the camera it makes absolute sense because you won't need to pump up the buffer if your card is fast enough. Buffer is the key here. If I get a full-frame its going to be 4K, CFast/UHS-II, and likely have the Low-pass delete. But I'm very happy with my 7DmII as it is, so that's a sort of "if I get disposable income and get all the other goodies I want... maybe."

 

[AlexB]

Dude, it's CFast not C-fast. :

Hey, it happens But I fixed it... CFast, CFast, CFast

What I mean though is that if they implement it in the 5D Mark IV, it may end up like the 5D Mark III. While its there and it's nice, it is still a stills oriented camera with an ok video function. The 5D Mark III is only so good at video because of Magic Lantern. I wouldn't rave about 8 bit 4.2.0 internal 4K recording. it would be nice, but not great.

I would LOVE if they did a proper 4K implementation in the next 5D, of course! But I just don't see it as very likely. Especially if you believe what was posted around the time the 5Ds and 5Dsr was announced. It said that Canon will make more "market specific" (or whatever it's called, sorry I cannot find the words) cameras, and not "one camera fits all" type cameras.

They did do good with the C300 mark IIi thought. Lets hope that carries over to the next video oriented DSLR.

Like always, this just my personal thoughts and opinion.

 

[dolina]

I would not at all mind if Canon uses the a7R II's image sensor.

Having said that here are way cheaper full frame SLRs with higher MP and video than the $2,747 stills-only 16.2MP Nikon Df.

20.2MP Canon 6D $1,399
24.3MP Nikon D610 $1,497
24.3MP Nikon D750 $1,997
22.3MP Canon 5D3 $2,499

Here are the more expensive full frame SLRs with higher MP and video

36.3MP Nikon D810 $2,997
50.6MP Canon 5DS $3,699
50.6MP Canon 5DS R $3,899
18.1MP Canon 1D X $5,299
16.2MP Nikon D4S $5,997*
18.1MP Canon 1D C $7,999

Source: http://www.bhphotovideo.com

Even a half done implementation of 4K resolution video is better than just 1080p.

 

[Dylan777]

Can't wait to see 1DX II specs. Hope Canon doesn't go too crazzzy in pricing.

 

[dolina]

Can't wait to see 1DX II specs. Hope Canon doesn't go too crazzzy in pricing.

The MSRP of the original 1D X was $6,800 last October 18, 2011.

 

[gregory4000]

Todd, A close friend I've know since he was twelve, works in R&D for Zeiss. Zeiss has collaborated closely with Sony as you know for lens compatibility. He stated that the new Sony A7R ll will come close to an unbelievable 19 stops of dynamic range.

 

[pedro]

Todd, A close friend I've know since he was twelve, works in R&D for Zeiss. Zeiss has collaborated closely with Sony as you know for lens compatibility. He stated that the new Sony A7R ll will come close to an unbelievable 19 stops of dynamic range.

that is quite something...

 

[privatebydesign]

Todd, A close friend I've know since he was twelve, works in R&D for Zeiss. Zeiss has collaborated closely with Sony as you know for lens compatibility. He stated that the new Sony A7R ll will come close to an unbelievable 19 stops of dynamic range.

that is quite something...

And impossible in even a full 16bit RAW file. And we all now Sony cook their RAW files (as do Nikon) and they are not 'RAW' files.

 

[davidcl0nel]

And my neighbour told me, they decrease the file size to a 8 bit file per color and also get 33 stops of dynamic range! No, 42 stops!

Math my friends, math....

 

[neuroanatomist]

Todd, A close friend I've know since he was twelve, works in R&D for Zeiss. Zeiss has collaborated closely with Sony as you know for lens compatibility. He stated that the new Sony A7R ll will come close to an unbelievable 19 stops of dynamic range.

If Todd mentions that he's got a bridge he'd like to sell, or some swampland in Kansas, you should absolutely jump on the deal!!!

 

[Maiaibing]

So long as their sales numbers are strong relative to other brands they will continue on the (financially) successful path they're on.

Photographers continue to make this mistake: Canon is a business, their interest is money. They are not camera design aficionados trying to win an engineering award.

Where did you get this nonsense from??

Canon's camera division is suffering very badly.

Check out Canon's latest share holders conference in which they admitted having missed the DSLR market. Also you want to check out their warnings that both DSLR sales and compact camera sales will be down (a lot, a lot) again this year (after already having suffered several years consecutive double digit DSLR sales drops). Finally, they have already this year issued yet another earnings warning after significantly missing Q1 earnings specifically pointing to the disappointing performance of their camera division highlighting falling compact camera sales.

Talk about denial...

 

[meywd]

So long as their sales numbers are strong relative to other brands they will continue on the (financially) successful path they're on.

Photographers continue to make this mistake: Canon is a business, their interest is money. They are not camera design aficionados trying to win an engineering award.

Where did you get this nonsense from??

Canon's camera division is suffering very badly.

Check out Canon's latest share holders conference in which they admitted having missed the DSLR market. Also you want to check out their warnings that both DSLR sales and compact camera sales will be down (a lot, a lot) again this year (after already having suffered several years consecutive double digit DSLR sales drops). Finally, they have already this year issued yet another earnings warning after significantly missing Q1 earnings specifically pointing to the disappointing performance of their camera division highlighting falling compact camera sales.

Talk about denial...

compact cameras sales are down for everyone..., so nothing new there, and DSLRs sales are also down for everyone, another old news, if you really want to show how canon is suffering, show that Sony sales increase while canons are down for new models, how many DSLRs did canon sell in 2014 in comparison to Sony's total (DSLR + Mirrorless)

 

[toodlebug]

There is no resolution at which an AA filter is unnecessary. If you take photo of an HDTV with an iPhone (8 megapixels, no AA filter), you will see huge moire patterns. If you quadruple that you get in the ballpark of the high-resolution DSLRs, and you would still get moire on a 4K TV or an HDTV from twice as far away. The same thing on clothing or fencing etc. of a suitable distance - if you increase the resolution it just means that the same clothing etc. further away (which previously was blurred due to lack of resolution) would induce moire.

Now some uses of a camera (perhaps natural landscapes, or astral photography) may not suffer from moire so it's nice to have a choice, but for general purpose use, taking photos of man-made objects, you need an AA filter.

 

[Diko]

Why again "talk" about something which stays in the realm of uncertainty? Aside from the fact that there WILL be a 5D m4 everything else is useless.

 

[Dylan777]

Can't wait to see 1DX II specs. Hope Canon doesn't go too crazzzy in pricing.

The MSRP of the original 1D X was $6,800 last October 18, 2011.

My guess on 1Dx II will be $7500 at phase one.

 

[Maiaibing]

there is nothing significant coming in the near future

So true. Time to move on. Rumors like this will not cut it for me anymore - Canon has to show they can catch up.

Will check out the 5DIV specs once its officially launched. Meanwhile I wish the remaining hopeful good luck with having Canon surprise us all.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Aside from the fact that there WILL be a 5D m4 everything else is useless.

Are you sure? Canon might not last that long. I hear the a7RII is the final nail in the coffin. dSLRs in general, and Canon in particular, are doomed. Everyone's saying it!

 

[Maiaibing]

compact cameras sales are down for everyone..., so nothing new there, and DSLRs sales are also down for everyone, another old news, if you really want to show how canon is suffering, show that Sony sales increase while canons are down for new models, how many DSLRs did canon sell in 2014 in comparison to Sony's total (DSLR + Mirrorless)

What a strange comment. I do not give a iota who is doing financially well or bad. If you find this stimulating you can run all the numbers you like yourself.

I'm just pointing out the distorted facts regarding Canon's camera earnings posted by another forum member. A company I have worked with and who's finances I follow closely for the same reason.

 

[meywd]

compact cameras sales are down for everyone..., so nothing new there, and DSLRs sales are also down for everyone, another old news, if you really want to show how canon is suffering, show that Sony sales increase while canons are down for new models, how many DSLRs did canon sell in 2014 in comparison to Sony's total (DSLR + Mirrorless)

What a strange comment. I do not give a iota who is doing financially well or bad. If you find this stimulating you can run all the numbers you like yourself.

I'm just pointing out the distorted facts regarding Canon's camera earnings posted by another forum member. A company I have worked with and who's finances I follow closely for the same reason.

You are saying that it's distorted, and I am saying that's not true, because the down is not because canon is losing sales but because everyone is losing sales, so unless you have clear data to show that they are only the ones - at least relatively - losing sales you can't say that it's distorted.