Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specification List [CR1]

[Rick]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

 

[slclick]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Let's hope they are not stupid enough to release a ~$3500 camera with poor high iso noise ratio due to the need to keep up with the Jonses and MP

 

[scyrene]

I really hope 24MP is not the final number. I was totally hoping for 28MP.

+1, 28 to 36 MP

BTW I wonder if Canon leaks these on purpose to see what we say :

Hopefully, but as I heard from the better posters here, core tech and specs should be concrete within the year of production and release. However, maybe Canon is leaking out the 24MP but releasing a 28MP to "surprise" us

Or keeping it to 24MP to make it as good as possible for high iso

Well if you downsample - i.e. view or print at a standard size (without cropping), it won't harm you.

 

[scyrene]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Um, Canon has the highest MP FF DSLR of any manufacturer at present. The top of the line from Nikon and Canon are both 20MP. And plenty of professionals here complain about 'too high' MP counts. So... you're talking out of a place that isn't your mouth.

(I'm one of the proponents of higher MP counts in general - or at least that they are not the bad thing some people say. But to claim the 5D4 would be 'stupid' if it were lower than 36MP is... stupid).

 

[millsrg1]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Um, Canon has the highest MP FF DSLR of any manufacturer at present. The top of the line from Nikon and Canon are both 20MP. And plenty of professionals here complain about 'too high' MP counts. So... you're talking out of a place that isn't your mouth.

(I'm one of the proponents of higher MP counts in general - or at least that they are not the bad thing some people say. But to claim the 5D4 would be 'stupid' if it were lower than 36MP is... stupid).

I think you're way off here. I'm no pro but a simple look at the Nikon website shows the D810 at 36.6 MP and the D750 and D610 both at 24.3 - both are FX sensors.

 

[romanr74]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Um, Canon has the highest MP FF DSLR of any manufacturer at present. The top of the line from Nikon and Canon are both 20MP. And plenty of professionals here complain about 'too high' MP counts. So... you're talking out of a place that isn't your mouth.

(I'm one of the proponents of higher MP counts in general - or at least that they are not the bad thing some people say. But to claim the 5D4 would be 'stupid' if it were lower than 36MP is... stupid).

I think you're way off here. I'm no pro but a simple look at the Nikon website shows the D810 at 36.6 MP and the D750 and D610 both at 24.3 - both are FX sensors.

Hence what?

 

[Maximilian]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Funny, that I would think exactly the other way 'round and would call everything above 30 MP "special purpose".
And it seems that I am not the only one and surely a lot of those are not in the Canon camp.

So maybe you should start asking Nikon why they made a 750D or Sony about their a7 II (both at 24,3 MP).
Or even better: ask the wedding guys, the general photo journalist, the "allrounder" photographer, what MP count they'd prefer. I suppose those three companies (C/N/S) already did it and their R&D departments did response to the "general purpose pro camera" market.

But of course a forum member knows much more about the general photo market than the dedicated companies.

Edit: Maybe you could think about redefining your needs and wants from beeing "general purpose"?

 

[romanr74]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Funny, that I would think exactly the other way 'round and would call everything above 30 MP "special purpose".
And it seems that I am not the only one and surely a lot of those are not in the Canon camp.

So maybe you should start asking Nikon why they made a 750D or Sony about their a7 II (both at 24,3 MP).
Or even better: ask the wedding guys, the general photo journalist, the "allrounder" photographer, what MP count they'd prefer. I suppose those three companies (C/N/S) already did it and their R&D departments did response to the "general purpose pro camera" market.

But of course a forum member knows much more about the general photo market than the dedicated companies.

+1

 

[ahsanford]

The problem with that for me is when I'm shooting birds in flight, jumping from forested backgrounds to clear sky etc. I want to be able compensate exposure properly, and if I use aperture priority, I don't get to choose a minimum shutter speed that would work in flight, and even if it did, the problem would come when the bird lands. Shutter priority seems to work, but im left to shoot wide open. Or at least can't choose a constant aperture since it will jump a third of stop to help compensate with the auto iso. I've heard arguments plenty of times that "your in manual, so shoot in manual. Theres no need for compensation" I strongly disagree. Shutter speed and aperture effect the look of my image. I want my iso to be as low as possible, and changing my iso isn't as fast as the cameras metering.

I've run into this a few times with my niece's Tae Kwan Do events. It's admittedly not birding, but it's has elements of speed, unpredictability, and in the case of her dojo/dojang, the lighting is batsh-- crazy with a lot of searing bright light at times and murky dark gymnasium-like light in others (all in the same main hall!).

I love auto-ISO with aperture-priority, but I could see how the limited spread of minimum shutter speed options would punish you for birding. I've long wondered why you can't choose anything faster with auto ISO than 1/250s (at least on my 5D3). You should be able to input whatever you need there, which I think they expanded options for with the 5DS but did not completely rectify. Just give us a field to input a number and obsessives about 1/(focal length) would be set for any lens and specialized high speed needs would be completely covered.

- A

 

[Maiaibing]

• 5DS-ii ~50MP, 6'ish FPS, 4K-30fps video, GPS, WIFI, touch screen?, flicker

5DS/R has anti-flicker.

5DS/RII should have 65-70 MPIX. I can wait 4 years for that. Next stop 100 MPIX with the 5DS/RIII.

 

[Loswr]

The problem for Canon is that next to the D500, the 7D2 has a limited value proposition

Yes, I'm sure that's true in dilbertland, where lenses are cameras and the 1D C isn't a dSLR. The rest of us live in a place called reality, you should visit there sometime.

As others have noted the issue for Canon is not the D500 which on paper actually seems like a decent camera but the EOS 80D which will split the choice of many users because of the newer sensor, touch screen and partial weather sealing narrowing the gap. Between the Nikon D500 and the EOS 80D the 7D MKII may well be refreshed faster than many think.

As others have noted, the same was true for the 7D and the 70D. I don't think the 80D is a major concern for Canon as far as 7DII sales go, either way they make money.

But I do think those who are making guesses on 7DIII timing based on just two other data points have little basis for those guesses.

 

[Loswr]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Um, Canon has the highest MP FF DSLR of any manufacturer at present. The top of the line from Nikon and Canon are both 20MP. And plenty of professionals here complain about 'too high' MP counts. So... you're talking out of a place that isn't your mouth.

(I'm one of the proponents of higher MP counts in general - or at least that they are not the bad thing some people say. But to claim the 5D4 would be 'stupid' if it were lower than 36MP is... stupid).

I think you're way off here. I'm no pro but a simple look at the Nikon website shows the D810 at 36.6 MP and the D750 and D610 both at 24.3 - both are FX sensors.

Huh? Did your simple look happen to see the D5 on Nikon's website? Or do you not understand what 'top of the line' means? Heard of the 1D X II?

 

[Antono Refa]

4K display has 8MP. How is three times that resolution not future proof?

8K is 32MP, it's the math

A. So future proofing "in this age of 4K displays" (kind of you to drop the quote) is 8K? In this age, 4K hasn't come anywhere near 100% penetration, I wouldn't bet on the future popularity of 8K.

B. Those 4K and 8K screens will be used for two things: video editing (= small target audience), and watching movies (= very large screens, intended to be watched from a distance). I wouldn't bet on either of those being oft used to watch photos.

C. To get pixel sharp photos at 32MP, people would have to buy top of the line lenses and use pro techniques to stabilize the cameras, such as tripods. That is not what the average Joe is going to do. The average Joe will use a 5.5" phone (as Apple has recently discovered), bottom of the line lenses, such as EF-S kit lenses, etc, and wouldn't care less how his photos look on anything better than FHD resolution.

 

[tron]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Um, Canon has the highest MP FF DSLR of any manufacturer at present. The top of the line from Nikon and Canon are both 20MP. And plenty of professionals here complain about 'too high' MP counts. So... you're talking out of a place that isn't your mouth.

(I'm one of the proponents of higher MP counts in general - or at least that they are not the bad thing some people say. But to claim the 5D4 would be 'stupid' if it were lower than 36MP is... stupid).

I think you're way off here. I'm no pro but a simple look at the Nikon website shows the D810 at 36.6 MP and the D750 and D610 both at 24.3 - both are FX sensors.

And a simple look at Canon site shows 5DS(R) at 50Mp, 5D3 at 22Mp, 6D at 20MP.
So I believe all of you that simply ignore the 50MP FF camera are ... off. Let's don't forget that the next Nikon will be 42MP if they use Sony's new sensor. This is close to Canon's 50MP.

 

[Eersel]

Hey guys, I read the whole discussion since it started but I only found time to reply now. But anyway.....

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Rumored Specifications


•24.2MP Sensor
- A 2MP upgrade from 5D3 seems like a reasonable upgrade by Canon but 28MP requested by others seems reasonable also, so not much comment here. DPAF may or may not happen but clinging on it WILL happen. (Extra info: 5D2 21.1MP --> 5D3 22.3MP)

•61 AF Points (41 crosstype)
- Similar AF system from 5D3 but I guess this time it will borrow from the 1DX2 again, 61 AF Points (41 crosstype) and 61 AF points (21 crosstype) at f/8. So don't fret, a cool improvement also.

•DIGIC 7+ (Single)
- Absolute typo in my opinion, should be DIGIC 6+.

•7fps
- Improve from 6fps in 5D3, but honestly I think that 8fps (7.5fps) is much more appropriate.

•ISO 100-51,200 (expandable options)
- Remarked by a lot of friends here, ISO 100-51,200 native ISO ( with expandable options)

•3.2″ touchscreen LCD
- Borrow from 1DX2 again

•CFast/SD card slots
- CFast makes a lot of photogs angry but times is changing, so must we. First adopters will face the steep price but after less than a year, expect CFast to lower in price and become more common.

•Wifi built-in
- Sweet, remote shooting now more accessible

•GPS built-in
- Not sure if necessary, but why not?

•BG-E20 battery grip and LP-E20 battery
- Discussed widely but not elucidated by much. Don't fret on new battery. My evidence:
1DX2 introduced with new LP-E19 battery but still compatible with old LP-E4 series batteries. So.......
5D4 introduced with new LP-E20 battery but STILL COMPATBLE with older LP-E6 series batteries.
New battery introduced with new design and electronic architecture, maybe related with higher fps capability.

•Slight weight reduction
- Introduction of WiFi and GPS means shedding a bit of metal for better wireless connection.

Disclaimer: All above is my opinion only, based on evaluation of previous facts and current trends, and my own expectation. I have no connection with anyone in Canon Inc. If you don't like it, then don't. It's not a fact yet.

+1 On this

Again, I'd lose the GPS just to take the cost and put it in savings for the customer.

 

[ahsanford]

[87 quotes purged in the name of brevity, justice and freedom for all]

And a simple look at Canon site shows 5DS(R) at 50Mp, 5D3 at 22Mp, 6D at 20MP.
So I believe all of you that simply ignore the 50MP FF camera are ... off. Let's don't forget that the next Nikon will be 42MP if they use Sony's new sensor. This is close to Canon's 50MP.

If enthusiasts ran the product pipeline at Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc. I could see how people would be so bent out of shape about MP. "The more money you pay, the better camera you get, and that means it has more MP!" They'd offer an FF slate of cameras that were lower priced at 24 MP, mid-level priced at 36 MP and high-priced at 48 MP. [rubs hands together] Job done.

It's also total rubbish. Enthusiasts don't run product pipelines for a reason. They cannot gather that some people would gladly pay more money for something other than detail -- things like more powerful AF or metering systems, high burst rates and massive buffers, much better high ISO performance, 400k rated shutters, better build quality, etc.

I simply see Canon bifurcating the 5D line into two streams a la the 1Ds and 1D lines of years past. The 5DS is 'the detail line' for studio/landscape guys, and the 5D3/5D4 is the great 'all-arounder' out-in-the-field/events/handheld rig. One gets detail, the other gets frame rate and (likely) better high ISO. Easy peasy.

(The bigger question is why that same market split isn't offered to people with $7k burning a hole in their pockets. Where the hell is the high MP detail line for the 1D brand?!)

- A

 

[reef58]

This cry for MP's reminds me of the $200 700x telescope advertisement you see often.

 

[pierlux]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Um, Canon has the highest MP FF DSLR of any manufacturer at present. The top of the line from Nikon and Canon are both 20MP. And plenty of professionals here complain about 'too high' MP counts. So... you're talking out of a place that isn't your mouth.

(I'm one of the proponents of higher MP counts in general - or at least that they are not the bad thing some people say. But to claim the 5D4 would be 'stupid' if it were lower than 36MP is... stupid).

I think you're way off here. I'm no pro but a simple look at the Nikon website shows the D810 at 36.6 MP and the D750 and D610 both at 24.3 - both are FX sensors.

Hence what?

I think millsrg1's post is fitting better as a comment to Rick's statement, not scyrene's one.

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Um, Canon has the highest MP FF DSLR of any manufacturer at present. The top of the line from Nikon and Canon are both 20MP. And plenty of professionals here complain about 'too high' MP counts. So... you're talking out of a place that isn't your mouth.

(I'm one of the proponents of higher MP counts in general - or at least that they are not the bad thing some people say. But to claim the 5D4 would be 'stupid' if it were lower than 36MP is... stupid).

I think you're way off here. I'm no pro but a simple look at the Nikon website shows the D810 at 36.6 MP and the D750 and D610 both at 24.3 - both are FX sensors.

And a simple look at Canon site shows 5DS(R) at 50Mp, 5D3 at 22Mp, 6D at 20MP.
So I believe all of you that simply ignore the 50MP FF camera are ... off. Let's don't forget that the next Nikon will be 42MP if they use Sony's new sensor. This is close to Canon's 50MP.

Same here. Hey millsrg1, pay attention quoting posts, this forum is ruthless! ;D

 

[Loswr]

I doubt Canon is stupid enough to release a general purpose pro camera with less than 36 MPs since Nikon, Sony and Pentax are all at or above that number.

Um, Canon has the highest MP FF DSLR of any manufacturer at present. The top of the line from Nikon and Canon are both 20MP. And plenty of professionals here complain about 'too high' MP counts. So... you're talking out of a place that isn't your mouth.

(I'm one of the proponents of higher MP counts in general - or at least that they are not the bad thing some people say. But to claim the 5D4 would be 'stupid' if it were lower than 36MP is... stupid).

In the context of 36 MP being too high, a couple of friends who are wedding photographers were looking to replace their aging Nikon D700's at the time the D800 came out (before the 24 MP options), and they were advised to just replace with the same D700 model rather than getting a D800. That advice came from Nikon Professional Services.

 

[Maiaibing]

C. To get pixel sharp photos at 32MP, people would have to buy top of the line lenses and use pro techniques to stabilize the cameras, such as tripods. That is not what the average Joe is going to do. The average Joe will use a 5.5" phone (as Apple has recently discovered), bottom of the line lenses, such as EF-S kit lenses, etc, and wouldn't care less how his photos look on anything better than FHD resolution.

Such nonsense.

1) Every single lens you have performs better with more megapixels available. Try a 5DS/R one day.

2) You do not have to anything to stabilize your 32 MPIX camera compared to a 24 MPIX camera (or my 50 MPIX 5DSR or my coming 5DSRIII with 100 MPIX). This is such a wide spread myth and misunderstanding. When Joe views his results on print or on screen the 32 MPIX picture he took will look exactly as sharp as the same picture he took using a 24 MPIX camera (everything else equal). Exactly.. However Joe has the option of one day learning to use pro techniques and gaining more image sharpness with a 32 MPIX camera he can ever achieve with a 24 MPIX camera.

Its the same misunderstanding as when people think you have to resample a 5DSR picture to get better high ISO than from a 5D3. You do not have to do anything at all. Zilch. Zero. Just print or open up your smugmug page and you will enjoy the improved high iso from the 5DSR over the 5D3. As simple as that.

You are confusing 100% test shots with real life viewing of pictures. The results Joe - and everyone else in the world for that matter - enjoys looking at and sharing. Resampling is something we do for tests only. It provides the visual confirmation that the 5DSR will give you better high iso results than the 5D3.