Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Talk [CR1]

[nvsravank]

So that Magic Latern can work and give functionality that canon 'doesn't' want to give.

But I have to reiterate my original question: Why does a 5DS or a 7D2 get two DIGIC chips and 5D3/5D4 only gets one?

I'm not whining nearly so much as being curious. Just spitballing some reasons:

[list type=decimal]
[*]The (presumed) higher quality video that the 5D line records requires dedicated hardware that would make a second DIGIC chip problematic to fit in the housing, supply power to, etc.


[*]The 5D4's market identity will change relative to the 5D3 -- perhaps it will be a 'video first / stills second' sort of rig where stills fps are deprioritized and a second chip isn't needed.


[*]In the 5D4 design tradeoff of being (a) sexier than the 5D3 'enough' to get people to upgrade, yet (b) not sexy enough to steal 1D sales, Canon believes it can squeeze enough performance out of one chip at something like (as a hypothetical) 24 MP X 7 fps. The fear being that a (who knows?) 28 MP x 10 fps throughput that a second chip might enable will drive shutter/mirror costs too high or will steal some 1D sales.


[*]Battery life takes a hit with two chips, right? (But surely most folks would gladly take +3-4 fps for a 20% battery hit...) This can't be the main reason, can it?

[/list]

Candidly, #2 is nuts and #4 seems a reach (as a primary reason), so I'm looking for some technical read to back up #1 or perhaps we should call this what it is -- Canon will nerf the 5D4 because they feel like it, they can get away with it, etc.

- A

 

[Maiaibing]

I NEED FPS, NOT MPs!!!

Its called EOS 7DII. Available for sale any given day. Enjoy.

 

[dak723]

I'll go with Simon Young and a lot of others here who are wondering why, given current technology, anyone would actually want 32 MP on an all-around camera such as the 5D. I get it that depending on their type of photography, people frequently are blind to how deficits in certain features can be limitling for the types of photography they don't do. As primarily a landscaper, I've experienced the real-world challenges presented by the DR of Canon's sensors. I also know that if you bring the subject up on this forum there are plenty of folks eager to brand you a dilettante, a troll who should just go out and take pictures and learn to overcome the limits of the equipment.

I don't want to duplicate that kind of ignorance, but I'm genuinely curious about the value of 32-36 MP on an all-purpose camera. I can certainly think of the drawbacks. People with more technical expertise than me have disagreed on this thread about how much of a penalty high MP extracts in relation to fps, DR, file size, price, high ISO performance, etc. It may be more or less depending on the feature, but however small, it's always an inverse ratio in relation to MP. I remember when Nikon's 36 MP D3 came out. Reviewers and National Geographic photographers marveled at its stunning, almost medium-format resolution in a compact package you could lug up mountain passes into the world's scenic wonders. But universally, they also cautioned that to actually see the benefit of all that resolving power, you needed to shoot under almost clinical conditions: a heavy tripod, mirror lockup, remote or timed release, etc. The optical physics of 36 MP haven't changed. Who among the target market for a general-purpose full-frame camera shoots predominately under those conditions? Photojournalists, wedding photographers, studio portraitists, general assignment freelancers, street shooters, passionate amateurs? I doubt it.

O.K., say the magna-megapixelers, but as a landscaper, surely you can appreciate the value of 32-36 MP? Not really. To start: I know from experience how I lose the most shots, and if 32 MP means the 5D4 doesn't finally come into the 20-teens in DR, I'll stay with my 5D2. Or sadly, reluctantly, expensively, make the switch to Sony. Call me a troll. And there's this: take an expertly shot 24 MP exposure. Print it at 300 dpi across the centerfold of the glossiest of art magazines. Now do the same with a 32 MP shot. If you say you can tell the difference I'm pretty sure you're lying.

If you make your living traveling the arts and crafts fair circuit selling 4' prints, I can see where 32-36 MP would be of value. But that's what? Point 01% of the 5D market? And if raw resolution is the sine qua non, wouldn't you be better off with the 5Ds/r? And what are the real determinants of IQ? Why don't 1Dx(x) shooters complain about the fact that their cameras have fewer MP than the same-generation 5D, not to mention some cell phones? I don't mean to be tendentious. But it seems as if megapixelers want all the 5D's quick-focusing, high-ISO advantages lacking in their high resolution 5Ds/rs. And they want it without a price surcharge.

But I'm willing to have my mind changed. Explain to me why I should want the next 5D to have 30+ MP.

You have given all the good reasons why it should not. Yes some folks want the additional MPs to be able to crop more. But you have explained very well why, unless they use a tripod and use other shake resistant techniques, they won't see much better resolution than their old 18 to 24 MP camera. And folks don't get the physics of higher MPs = higher noise and lower DR. So, just hope that Canon gets it and can resist the pressure from the gear heads who think higher numbers equal better.

 

[Maiaibing]

I remember when Nikon's 36 MP D3 came out. Reviewers and National Geographic photographers marveled at its stunning, almost medium-format resolution in a compact package you could lug up mountain passes into the world's scenic wonders. But universally, they also cautioned that to actually see the benefit of all that resolving power, you needed to shoot under almost clinical conditions: a heavy tripod, mirror lockup, remote or timed release, etc.

What to say other than they were universally wrong (if indeed they said this nonsense). There is nothing you need to change when going from 8 to 12 to 14 to 36 to 50 to 100 MPIX. You can get some added advantage through careful technique, but there's no optical downside on the contrary every lens you own will perform better as MPIX goes up.

There are of course other considerations: need for an updated PC, the current technical limits of MPIX vs. noise levels, internal processing power etc. But optical drawbacks: No.

The optical physics of 36 MP haven't changed. Who among the target market for a general-purpose full-frame camera shoots predominately under those conditions? Photojournalists, wedding photographers, studio portraitists, general assignment freelancers, street shooters, passionate amateurs? I doubt it.

I enjoy my 50 MPIX every day. That covers: photojournalist, general assignment freelancer, street shooter & passionate amateur. 8)

And there's this: take an expertly shot 24 MP exposure. Print it at 300 dpi across the centerfold of the glossiest of art magazines. Now do the same with a 32 MP shot. If you say you can tell the difference I'm pretty sure you're lying.

Every time I sell to a magazine the always ask for one thing: The very largest file size available. And this is a specific request. Always. Magazines know what they prefer - and their conclusion is clear and unanimous: bigger is always better.

But I'm willing to have my mind changed. Explain to me why I should want the next 5D to have 30+ MP.

Why should you change your mind? Use the tool that gives you the results you need. Just remember that the needed tool may look very different for others.

 

[Etienne]

I NEED FPS, NOT MPs!!!

Get a 1DX, they will be cheaper than a 5D MkIV anyway.

Exactly! The 5D series is not designed to be a sports monster.
Buy the right tool, don't use a screw driver to hammer in a nail.

 

[hendrik-sg]

32MP = 8k

32 MP would allow for 8k, maybe we will see this on a 1dx Mark IV anytime next decade ;D

 

[Etienne]

I am cautiously optimistic about the 5DIV. I am hoping that Canon will deliver a game changer, something that thrills like the 5DII did when it was first released.

I really want a camera that can do great photos AND great video at the flip of a switch, with great ergonomics. It's a tall task but I believe that Canon is best positioned to pull that off, and the 5DIV might just get there. If not, I'll probably stay with my 5DIII / Sony PXW-X70 combo and wait and see what the C100 mk III offers.

The kit I really want is:

C100 Mk III with full sensor DPAF that works with all Canon lenses
5D Mk IV with full sensor DPAF, [swivel] touch screen
EOS-M4 with full sensor DPAF, swivel touch screen

All of the above with a 4K option. This is a kit I could fly with, manage alone or with 1-2 assistants, deliver great quality, multi-camera shoots, in almost any circumstance, at an affordable price.

I really think Canon is in the best position to do this kind of kit. Hopefully soon.

 

[kaihp]

The price also has a lot to do with how many processors are on board. Cameras are engineered to achieve a (profitable) price point as well as a feature set - nothing comes for free. Want another processor? Sure. How much more is everyone willing to pay for that camera? Yeah....

Dilbert -- respectfully, I'm not buying it. The 5DS has two chips in the same damn housing for (what we will assume) will be a similar 5D4 asking price. The only cost-confounding element to putting another chip in the 5D4 is if it forces a costlier/sturdier shutter/mirror design due to the increased fps, which makes sense.

I'ts been a decade since I last worked on large digital IC designs, but I would say that the pure manufacturing cost of a DIGIC 6+ processor is in the order of USD10, maybe USD15. This is based on a number of assumptions on die size and testing cost, but if it would grow a lot bigger (= more expensive), it would also be likely to consumer more power.

Now, the pure die cost is just a part of the total cost of adding a second processor. There's die testing cost, soldering, incremental (decremental?) manufacturing yield loss and board test cost. I would assume that Canon can reuse the dual-processor firmware from the existing products (1Dx, 5Ds, 7D2), so I don't see a cost increase from there.

 

[Ph0t0]

Re: 32MP = 8k

32 MP would allow for 8k, maybe we will see this on a 1dx Mark IV anytime next decade ;D

How does 32MP equal 8k?

 

[d]

Re: 32MP = 8k

32 MP would allow for 8k, maybe we will see this on a 1dx Mark IV anytime next decade ;D

How does 32MP equal 8k?

It doesn't. On a 3:2 sensor, you need a bit over 39MP to achieve native 8k UHD resolution (7680×4320) - people are forgetting about the differing aspect ratios of a full-frame stills sensor vs. the 16:9 ratio for UHDTV.

d.

 

[AdamBotond]

I NEED FPS, NOT MPs!!!

Get a 1DX, they will be cheaper than a 5D MkIV anyway.

Exactly! The 5D series is not designed to be a sports monster.
Buy the right tool, don't use a screw driver to hammer in a nail.

It is most certainly not. But you can go for 5Ds if you want high MP and then you can crop however you want. You are not happy with the DR and low light capabilities of the 5Ds? Then you will have to make a compromise with the 5D IV with lower MP, but better DR, high iso, and faster fps (even if some of you dont care about it). Because this is what 5D IV is going to be. A good compromise between a sports camera and a high MP beast.

 

[jrista]

...
Dilbert -- respectfully, I'm not buying it.
...

Then why don't you go and work for Canon and show them how to include an extra CPU for extra performance for a $0 decrease/increase in the profitability/cost of the camera?

Yeah, thought so.

Oh, and as for "8 fps" not being stellar, it used to be the speed of the professional 1D Mark II camera. But of course nobody ever thought that was good enough to use at Olympics, etc, did they? No... Maybe you should try reading up on Canon's product history so that you come across as being less ignorant.

Dilbert, why do you persist? I don't think a single person on these forums has any respect for your arguments. I myself find them...bewildering most of the time to say the least, and often just...ignorant. You really gain NOTHING by sticking around these forums and continuing your crusade... It certainly isn't going to gain you any respect, and only raises the ire of Neuro most of the time. You should seriously cut your losses and find an environment of like minded individuals...or just move on to better things in life. It isn't worth wasting away your life being the one ultra-contrary voice on a forum full of Canon fans.

 

[tron]

What I fail to understand is why some people ignore the fact that even Nikon has 2 24Mp FF cameras. Why Canon can't? Canon does not have a 36Mp camera but there are 2 flavors of 50Mp FF cameras.Also 810's successor will have the 42Mp excellent Sony sensor so it is (will be) 5Ds(R) competitor. So we are left with the lower Mp range: D610,D750 - 6D, 5D3 (or their successors). Both vendors have many models available to choose from. I understand about the need for more cropping capabilities but there is 5Ds(R) for that.

And by the way if Canon instead of increasing the megapixels in their 5Ds(R) models use the new
technology they will make them shine...

 

[Don Haines]

...
Dilbert -- respectfully, I'm not buying it.
...

Then why don't you go and work for Canon and show them how to include an extra CPU for extra performance for a $0 decrease/increase in the profitability/cost of the camera?

Yeah, thought so.

Oh, and as for "8 fps" not being stellar, it used to be the speed of the professional 1D Mark II camera. But of course nobody ever thought that was good enough to use at Olympics, etc, did they? No... Maybe you should try reading up on Canon's product history so that you come across as being less ignorant.

Dilbert, why do you persist? I don't think a single person on these forums has any respect for your arguments. I myself find them...bewildering most of the time to say the least, and often just...ignorant. You really gain NOTHING by sticking around these forums and continuing your crusade... It certainly isn't going to gain you any respect, and only raises the ire of Neuro most of the time. You should seriously cut your losses and find an environment of like minded individuals...or just move on to better things in life. It isn't worth wasting away your life being the one ultra-contrary voice on a forum full of Canon fans.

Jon, Thomas Payne may have said it best.....
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead"

 

[tron]

I NEED FPS, NOT MPs!!!

Its called EOS 7DII. Available for sale any given day. Enjoy.

And a high megapixel EOS is called 5Ds(R). I believe you have one. There is no need for another called 5DIV

 

[jrista]

...
Dilbert -- respectfully, I'm not buying it.
...

Then why don't you go and work for Canon and show them how to include an extra CPU for extra performance for a $0 decrease/increase in the profitability/cost of the camera?

Yeah, thought so.

Oh, and as for "8 fps" not being stellar, it used to be the speed of the professional 1D Mark II camera. But of course nobody ever thought that was good enough to use at Olympics, etc, did they? No... Maybe you should try reading up on Canon's product history so that you come across as being less ignorant.

Dilbert, why do you persist? I don't think a single person on these forums has any respect for your arguments. I myself find them...bewildering most of the time to say the least, and often just...ignorant. You really gain NOTHING by sticking around these forums and continuing your crusade... It certainly isn't going to gain you any respect, and only raises the ire of Neuro most of the time. You should seriously cut your losses and find an environment of like minded individuals...or just move on to better things in life. It isn't worth wasting away your life being the one ultra-contrary voice on a forum full of Canon fans.

Jon, Thomas Payne may have said it best.....
"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead"

Heh. Don't think I could have put it better...

 

[unfocused]

Dilbert, why do you persist? I don't think a single person on these forums has any respect for your arguments. I myself find them...bewildering most of the time to say the least, and often just...ignorant. You really gain NOTHING by sticking around these forums and continuing your crusade... It certainly isn't going to gain you any respect, and only raises the ire of Neuro most of the time. You should seriously cut your losses and find an environment of like minded individuals...or just move on to better things in life. It isn't worth wasting away your life being the one ultra-contrary voice on a forum full of Canon fans.

Hey, Dilbert has made a lot of progress in the past year. Of course, he started from a very low bar, but I detect an effort on his part to at least try to be slightly less uninformed and irrational. Yes, at times it seems like he takes two steps backward after taking one step forward, but that's not always the case. (although in this case, he is certainly dead wrong. To digress briefly, the entire debate over processors has been silly and back*sswords. To repeat, the processors do not determine the feature set. The desired feature set is determined first and that decides the processing power needed.)

If you need an example of Dilbert's progress, review some of the recent silliness over DPReview. He's been much more rational and fair during the DPReview Witch Trials than the ubersensitive individuals who cannot seem to comprehend the whole concept of what a "review" actually means.

I'm not comfortable trying to drive anyone off of this site. I've seen too many talented, professional photographers give up in frustration because a handful of ultra-prolific commenters want to be self-appointed experts on everything.

 

[Ozarker]

Sorry to be mean, but many of the comments here are laughable.

Fact: The 5D IV will be better than the 5D III.

Fact: The 5D IV will not be as good as the 1D X II.

There isn't that much space between the two, so if people are realistic it doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out what is likely and what isn't.

Fact: Canon has done extensive market research and knows what features they need to include.

Fact: If it doesn't have the features you want, no amount of whining on the Internet will change the fact that your desires do not reflect what a majority of buyers consider important.

Fact: Arguing over processors is pointless. Canon will use whatever processor is needed to provide the feature set they have already determined is needed for the camera to sell. In other words, the features drive the processor. The processor does not drive the feature set.

So, for those of you dreaming of unicorns, you might as well start composing your rants now.

Some ARE already ranting.

 

[timcz]

Never fear everyone - I decided not to wait and purchased my 5dsR the other day, so judging by my previous luck, they'll announce full specs within the week, then everyone can start arguing again with a bit more certainty.

 

[nvsravank]

...

I'm not trying to argue that processors have anything to do with features (in this thread), rather that they don't come for free. A Canon 5DIII with multiple DIGIC chips is going to be more expensive than a Canon 5DIII with a single DIGIC

...

Dilbert, you tend to take it to extremes. While it is true that adding any functionality / hardware has additional cost, we here in the forums don't know the actual costs for Canon. We can only speculate.

While there is additional cost, what we can only do is to look at possibilities. Now look at it this way:
Canon has delivered higher throughput in a 5D enclosure in the 5Ds. They have done it at a price similar to the 5D range.

Are the costs going to be the same as 5Ds to include a second processor in the 5D IV? No. They would need to change firmware to handle DPAF, and on chip ADC that are expected (hoped for).

But we can see rationally that if Canon deems it is necessary to have that functionality, they can do it in the price envelope.

So we ask for it hoping that canon will hear us.

What is wrong with it?