5D4 @ 30 MP X 7 fps --> enough upside from the 5DS for you?

[Eldar]

New models from Canon improve or evolve each area of the cameras performance. Just looking at the number of MP is being short sighted.

The performance of the sensor, communications, autofocus capabilities, video capabilities, Canon tweaks them all to provide a improved product I'm almost every area.

This means that some will see no reason to buy because their desired tweak is not there, but many will buy a product that is upgraded in every area which Canon believes is the best solution that has worked for them in the past.

So, we may see a improved sensor with on chip A-D converter, maybe dual pixel, Wi-Fi, GPS, better autoexposure, better autofocus, a few more MP, better video, you get the point.

If your current camera does the job, unless there is a badly needed new feature, you might skip a model before upgrading. I shoot in very low theatrical lighting, often at ISO 25600, so unless that is substantially better, I'd be inclined to pass. A Good used 1DX can be had cheaply which might be a low light improvement enough for me to switch at little cost.

I agree with this. 30MP is a a good improvement from the 5DIII and it should be plenty for the vast majority. If you need more, you go for the 5DSR. In line with what Mt S.P. says, I would prefer other sensor improvements than resolution beyond 30MP. No banding, better noise pattern, improved low light performance, and DR would be much higher on my list than more resolution. 30MP with on-chip ADC could well indicate that this is realistic.

I hope the 7fps, even though that would be enough for me, is not just to limit internal competition, but an indication they have a mirror design that will provide the best silent shutter in the Canon lineup.

Significant improvements to me would be better manual focus capability (changeable focusing screens or something more advanced), DPAF ala 1DX-II and metering locked to AF point. Next level down would be more shots/charge, wifi and built in radio for flash. Even though I have not yet bothered to use the GPS on my 1DX-II yet, I believe it is a nice feature.

 

[Mikehit]

Mr. Sanford, you and I both know that there are people all over these boards saying that 10 fps on a 5D III body would kill 1DX II sales. I've seen it scores of times. That is all they dwell on.

Fact is, the same could be said for the 7D Mark II... except that it would be said it takes sales from the 5D and 1D lines. It may be a choice for birders, but I suspect many of those same people either choose not to spend on a 1DX II because they can't afford it to begin with.

I wonder how many birders with a 1DX would be just as happy with a 7D Mark II? Especially when the mythical "reach advantage" is thrown in.

I get the distinct feeling that if the AF on the 7DII were as solid and reliable as the 1Dx2 then it really would be a serious challenge.

 

[Ozarker]

Respectfully disagree. Folks in the market for a 1D rig that instead opt for a camera that costs half as much is very bad for Canon

But Canon will not undermine it's priciest / most prestigious rigs to the point that folks will pay 50% of that pricier model for 90% of the functionality. They will engineer a relatively smoothly climbing 'continuum of value' in their portfolio where there are no obvious bargains and there are no clearly overpriced ripoffs.

- A

Mr. Sanford, with all due respect, do you really think that 10 fps on a 5D Mark IV would bring it to within being 90% the camera that the 1DX Mark II is? Do you really? I don't think you do, but you keep saying it. What gives?

With that very statement you are putting huge weight on 14 fps as being the most important reason to get a 1DX mark II. A 5D body at 10 fps is 29% slower than the 1DX II.
At 9 fps a 5D body would be 36% slower.

And why, when you mention fps do you keep upping the ante for this supposed 1DX II killer to 12 fps? Besides you, the upper range mentioned was never more than 10 fps.

With all you've said in mind:

People might want to get over the notion that high FPS is 'why you buy a 1D rig':

High fps does not define the 1D line, it's just the eye-popping spec everyone dwells on. 1D bodies have a TON of exclusive stuff that has nothing to do with speed and landscape / studio folks would give their left nut for it.

- A

It is that ton of exclusive features you talk about that protects 1DX Mark II sales (as if it needs protecting). Upping the 5d to 10fps (Still 29% slower) wouldn't hurt the 1DX II.

You say fps does not define the 1D line. That the fps is "just the eye-popping spec everyone dwells on." Then you say 10 fps on a 5D would eat 1DX II sales.

So which is it?

Finally,

Folks in the market for a 1D rig that instead opt for a camera that costs half as much is very bad for Canon

- A

Why is that "very bad for Canon? What are the profit margins for each camera? Selling the 5D instead of the flagship 1DX Mark II might very well be more profitable per unit.

Not picking on you. I just like to watch people go 'round in circles saying something isn't important, then that it very important, then not important... claim manufacturing a shutter box for 10 FPS would be extremely costly when they have no idea (by their own admission) that they don't know what they are talking about when it comes to fab and manufacturing costs. For all we know the existing shutter/mirror might handle 10 fps already.

It is the ton of exclusive features you talk about that makes the 1DX Mark II special. That is the reason to choose it over the 5D Mark III... not 4 frames per second difference.

Have a good day buddy.

 

[Mikehit]

This is what the 5DIII should have been.

Yeah, right.
Put in the 5Dii a load of technology that hadn't been developed at the time.

 

[Maiaibing]

- the CIPA rating may be quite a bit better from the 5Ds 700 shot CIPA rating.

Forget to comment on this. Excellent point. Single DIGIC rigs are leaving some throughput on the table compared to dual DIGIC rigs, but the battery life is clearly better.

- A

How much are you getting out of a Canon battery?

I have never had anything even close to only 700 pic on my 5DS/R. My best guess is that I get around 1.200 on a fully charged Canon battery. I do get less with non-Canon batteries - and its the first camera where I notice any difference to the originals.

I don't know how the CIPA testing is done, and I'm sure shooting styles, screen usage and conditions play an important part - so YMMV and have very little relevance to what I see + I'm not tracking this in a systematic way except that based on experience as my guide line is that I normally feel comfortable with only one spare with me.

 

[ahsanford]

I agree with this. 30MP is a a good improvement from the 5DIII and it should be plenty for the vast majority. If you need more, you go for the 5DSR. In line with what Mt S.P. says, I would prefer other sensor improvements than resolution beyond 30MP. No banding, better noise pattern, improved low light performance, and DR would be much higher on my list than more resolution. 30MP with on-chip ADC could well indicate that this is realistic.

I hope the 7fps, even though that would be enough for me, is not just to limit internal competition, but an indication they have a mirror design that will provide the best silent shutter in the Canon lineup.

Agree -- I think a vast majority of prospective 5D4 folks are hoping for better DR/noise than they are the 'horsepower' top-line specs of pixels/fps/AF.

I simply bring up FPS b/c I believe Canon could give us more without limiting the potential of the sensor (they are relatively decoupled). But you and others have reminded me of the silent shutter, which is a key feature. Perhaps that does put a ceiling on the fps.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Have a good day buddy.

No worries -- I appreciate the depth and thoughtfulness of your responses, I really do.

I, you, and many here understand that FPS isn't the sole differentiator between the 5D and 1D lines. I've said this many times in many threads. This is a nuanced market and one spec doesn't dominate it -- but one spec can influence it.

I'm arguing that FPS is a nontrivial reason why people opt for the 1DX/1DX2. Of that slice of 1DX/1DX2 users (let's completely guess and say it's 20% of the 1DX2 userbase), they might opt for a smaller / lighter FF rig with higher resolution and X FPS at 50-60% of the cost. I'm just saying that when X is high enough, the predominantly speed-driven side of the prospective 1DX2 market -- that previous swag of 20% -- might take the much cheaper option.

I am not saying that the world will end for 1DX2 sales. I am saying the cheaper product will erode the sales of the pricier product because of that 5D4 FPS decision, that's all.

But again -- that's not what this thread is entirely about. I want to know if everyone finds it interesting/correct/fair that this future 5D rig is not worthy of the same throughput as last year's 5DS.

- A

 

[Loswr]

So, no, FPS isn't everything. FPS isn't the only reason to get a 1D rig. But having a clear gap between the 5D line ad 1D line on this feature helps Canon defend its asking price of the 1D line. So does having a gap in metering, having a gap in build quality, having a gap in AF, etc.

AF point-linked spot metering. You've hit the nail on the head, that's Canon's differentiation strategy for the 1-
series.

That...and maybe they'll make only 1-series bodes compatible with the limited-edition 50mm f/1.4 IS they're about to release.

 

[ahsanford]

So, no, FPS isn't everything. FPS isn't the only reason to get a 1D rig. But having a clear gap between the 5D line ad 1D line on this feature helps Canon defend its asking price of the 1D line. So does having a gap in metering, having a gap in build quality, having a gap in AF, etc.

AF point-linked spot metering. You've hit the nail on the head, that's Canon's differentiation strategy for the 1-
series.

That...and maybe they'll make only 1-series bodes compatible with the limited-edition 50mm f/1.4 IS they're about to release.

I would honestly pay $300 right now for AF-linked spot metering on my aging 5D3. I've considered going to ML to get this feature, but (a) I don't want to brick my main rig and (b) I am too used to the Canon menus/interface at this point.

But this is a throughput thread, Neuro. Stop dangling 50 prime catnip at me.

- A

 

[Loswr]

But this is a throughput thread, Neuro. Stop dangling 50 prime catnip at me.

Lol. But don't tell me you're not asking for it...

 

[jeffa4444]

New models from Canon improve or evolve each area of the cameras performance. Just looking at the number of MP is being short sighted.

The performance of the sensor, communications, autofocus capabilities, video capabilities, Canon tweaks them all to provide a improved product I'm almost every area.

This means that some will see no reason to buy because their desired tweak is not there, but many will buy a product that is upgraded in every area which Canon believes is the best solution that has worked for them in the past.

So, we may see a improved sensor with on chip A-D converter, maybe dual pixel, Wi-Fi, GPS, better autoexposure, better autofocus, a few more MP, better video, you get the point.

If your current camera does the job, unless there is a badly needed new feature, you might skip a model before upgrading. I shoot in very low theatrical lighting, often at ISO 25600, so unless that is substantially better, I'd be inclined to pass. A Good used 1DX can be had cheaply which might be a low light improvement enough for me to switch at little cost.

I'm with you on this one I would like to see better DR in low light for me far more useful than a slightly faster FPS its why I use the 6D. For sports / aerial I get the FPS argument but 1 FPS better than the MKIII is still better than they currently have. Cleaner images via an A-D converter would also herald better useful images.

 

[rrcphoto]

- the CIPA rating may be quite a bit better from the 5Ds 700 shot CIPA rating.

Forget to comment on this. Excellent point. Single DIGIC rigs are leaving some throughput on the table compared to dual DIGIC rigs, but the battery life is clearly better.

- A

How much are you getting out of a Canon battery?

I have never had anything even close to only 700 pic on my 5DS/R. My best guess is that I get around 1.200 on a fully charged Canon battery. I do get less with non-Canon batteries - and its the first camera where I notice any difference to the originals.

I don't know how the CIPA testing is done, and I'm sure shooting styles, screen usage and conditions play an important part - so YMMV and have very little relevance to what I see + I'm not tracking this in a systematic way except that based on experience as my guide line is that I normally feel comfortable with only one spare with me.

it's all relative.

the 5D Mark III had a CIPA rating of 950
the 5Ds .. 700

So I suspect that canon wants it to be closer to the Mark III than the 5Ds.

 

[StudentOfLight]

You'll have to pry my 5D3 from my cold, dead hands!

They don't have to take yours. I willingly put mine on the market ...

 

[ahsanford]

it's all relative.

the 5D Mark III had a CIPA rating of 950
the 5Ds .. 700

So I suspect that canon wants it to be closer to the Mark III than the 5Ds.

Sure. As I posted before, with just one chip, your battery life is far better. The 5D2 and 5D3 had only one chip.

If IQ was the same, would you rather have the 5D3's +250 shot capacity or +3-4 fps above the 5D3 at the same battery life as the 5DS?

I'm rarely shooting the full 6 FPS on my 5D3 today yet even I would take the latter were it offered. Battery life has never been a problem for me, and I gladly would sacrifice some of it (not down to mirrorless levels!) for a boost in performance for those odd times I need high framerate.

- A

 

[Phil Lowe]

If the latest rumor turns out to be true, 5D4 stills users will get 30 MP x 7 fps.

That would (crudely) put the 5D4 throughput here in comparison:

1DX2 = 20.2 MP x 16 fps = 323.2 MP/s*
5DS = 50 x 5 = 250 MP/s
5D4 = 30 x 7 = 210 MP/s
7D2 = 20.2 MP x 10 fps = 202 MP/s

One would think parity with the 5DS would be in order here, and as such, one might think 8-9 fps might have been the better sweet spot of 'better than the 5D3' yet 'no threat to steal pricier 1DX2 sales'.

Agree/disagree?

- A

7fps will be fine so long as Canon takes the arbitrary (and ridiculous) write speed limiter off the SD slot (capped at 133x on the 5D3) and increases the buffer. For my money, 6fps would be fine on the 5D3 were it not for the handicapped SD slot. I shoot the 7D2 and Nikon D500 when I feel the need for speed.

 

[StudentOfLight]

If the latest rumor turns out to be true, 5D4 stills users will get 30 MP x 7 fps.

That would (crudely) put the 5D4 throughput here in comparison:

1DX2 = 20.2 MP x 16 fps = 323.2 MP/s*
5DS = 50 x 5 = 250 MP/s
5D4 = 30 x 7 = 210 MP/s
7D2 = 20.2 MP x 10 fps = 202 MP/s

One would think parity with the 5DS would be in order here, and as such, one might think 8-9 fps might have been the better sweet spot of 'better than the 5D3' yet 'no threat to steal pricier 1DX2 sales'.

Agree/disagree?

- A

7fps will be fine so long as Canon takes the arbitrary (and ridiculous) write speed limiter off the SD slot (capped at 133x on the 5D3) and increases the buffer. For my money, 6fps would be fine on the 5D3 were it not for the handicapped SD slot. I shoot the 7D2 and Nikon D500 when I feel the need for speed.

I used a simple spreadsheet to estimate buffer performance for different initial buffers for the given 30MP, 7fps and CF write speed:

 

[jdavis37]

If the latest rumor turns out to be true, 5D4 stills users will get 30 MP x 7 fps.

That would (crudely) put the 5D4 throughput here in comparison:

1DX2 = 20.2 MP x 16 fps = 323.2 MP/s*
5DS = 50 x 5 = 250 MP/s
5D4 = 30 x 7 = 210 MP/s
7D2 = 20.2 MP x 10 fps = 202 MP/s

One would think parity with the 5DS would be in order here, and as such, one might think 8-9 fps might have been the better sweet spot of 'better than the 5D3' yet 'no threat to steal pricier 1DX2 sales'.

Agree/disagree?

- A

I just don't get why people think 8,9, or 10 fps would be a threat to 1DX Mark II sales. The 7D Mark II probably steals zero sales from the 1DX Mark II. However, there is absolutely no way of knowing that.

In my opinion, each of the three cameras have their own market niche including personal budgets. 10 FPS with Compact Flash/SD Card slots is a far cry from the 1DX Mark II with 14 FPS in viewfinder mode and 16 fps in live view plus Cfast/CF card slots.

There are all kinds of differences between all three cameras. Many seem to think that FPS between the two FF cameras is the decider.

Personally, if the 5D mark IV and the 1DX Mark II were even on my radar right now (In my budget range) and the Mark IV had 10 fps I'd still get the 1DX mark II.

That's just me.

Everyone of course has different triggers and not everyone is driven by the same wants/desires. I seem to be an outlier in that my eyes just prefer larger pixels, even when cropping. I find feathers hold up better when shot with larger pixels. So going to 30MP did NOT excite me while I am sure others are still wishing it were more.

But given I am a hobbyist who primarily shoots birds and critters, a larger buffer and higher frame rate is very important. When I bought my 5D3 I knew it was NOT a dedicated action camera, but found it to be a wonderful does everything well body that I have thoroughly enjoyed.

That said if the 5D4 had offered 10 fps (assuming the 30 MP sensor looks good) I would certainly buy it. As it stands now I am saving for the 1D-X2. I want faster frame rate and a bigger buffer. The 5D3 is an "almost 6 fps" camera in that as the batteries discharge frame rate drops, and fairly quickly. The 5D4 at 7 fps for me was a fatal.

Not criticizing, just analyzing as to how it pertains to me. Everyone will be uniquely different but for this buyer the frame rate was a fatal error. Had it been 9 fps I would have had to give it more thought. At 10 fps it would have stolen at least 1 DX-2 sale!

 

[rrcphoto]

it's all relative.

the 5D Mark III had a CIPA rating of 950
the 5Ds .. 700

So I suspect that canon wants it to be closer to the Mark III than the 5Ds.

Sure. As I posted before, with just one chip, your battery life is far better. The 5D2 and 5D3 had only one chip.

If IQ was the same, would you rather have the 5D3's +250 shot capacity or +3-4 fps above the 5D3 at the same battery life as the 5DS?

I'm rarely shooting the full 6 FPS on my 5D3 today yet even I would take the latter were it offered. Battery life has never been a problem for me, and I gladly would sacrifice some of it (not down to mirrorless levels!) for a boost in performance for those odd times I need high framerate.

- A

the same battery life of the 5Ds would net 8fps instead of 7fps.

 

[Vern]

Don't forget silent shutter. For many 5D users (wedding photographers in particular, but others as well) this is far more important than frames per second. I'm still having some adjustment shock from losing the 5D silent shutter with the 1Dx II. There is absolutely nothing silent about that shutter. Keeping the shutter silent in the 5D may limit just how fast the frame rate can be.

Agreed. I just purchased the 5DSR for use w wildlife/landscape where max res is desired and when fast action isn't anticipated, and I love the super quiet shutter - unfortunately, the skittish mammalian wildlife I have in mind also would be best shot with a higher ISO capable body. I have the 1DX I that I use for BIF and indoor sports but have tried it for deer/fox on the 'silent' shutter mode and they always jump/bolt unless the wind is howling. Not had this problem with the 5DIII on silent shutter. I'm sure the 1DX II would be fine on a safari with animals accustom to mechanical sounds, but in the eastern forest of the U.S., "click" is more likely to be a trigger pull than a shutter release and natural selection has left its mark. If the 1DX II had a truly silent shutter setting, I would upgrade for that and the other improvements over the 1DX I.

5D4 sounds great, but seems to fall right between my current bodies and I doubt I would compromise to use it - though if I only had one body, it might be the one.

As always, critical features are in the eye of the beholder.

 

[ahsanford]

But given I am a hobbyist who primarily shoots birds and critters, a larger buffer and higher frame rate is very important. When I bought my 5D3 I knew it was NOT a dedicated action camera, but found it to be a wonderful does everything well body that I have thoroughly enjoyed.

That said if the 5D4 had offered 10 fps (assuming the 30 MP sensor looks good) I would certainly buy it. As it stands now I am saving for the 1D-X2. I want faster frame rate and a bigger buffer. The 5D3 is an "almost 6 fps" camera in that as the batteries discharge frame rate drops, and fairly quickly. The 5D4 at 7 fps for me was a fatal.

Not criticizing, just analyzing as to how it pertains to me. Everyone will be uniquely different but for this buyer the frame rate was a fatal error. Had it been 9 fps I would have had to give it more thought. At 10 fps it would have stolen at least 1 DX-2 sale!

You are exactly the person I've been talking about for three pages on this thread. You are real, hooray! (Phew -- I'm not crazy.)

Thanks for the post.

- A