Canon EOS 5D Mark IV to be 30mp? [CR1]

[unfocused]

I think this is the alignment that you're referring to:

D8xx - 5Ds
D7xx - 5D
D6xx - 6D

Disagree to some extent, Dilbert -- I think we're talking apples and oranges here. Nikon's FF segmentation is good / better / best, whereas Canon is good / best at detail (MP) / best all-arounder (video, burst, high ISO, etc.). Those two schemes don't line up well at all once you leave the starting blocks.

The only alignment that matters is cost. Which is currently like this:

D5: $6,500
IDX II: $6000
5D s/r: $3,500-$3,700
Df: $3000
D810: $2,800
5D III: $2,600
D750: $2,000
D:500: $2,000
7DII: $1,600
D610: 1,500
6D: $1,500

Parsing features and trying to assign arbitrary slots to bodies is a bit goofy. Hardly anyone who is buying one of these cameras is new to the system (either Nikon or Canon) so they just have to make sure that each has a selection of bodies that fit into a general price range. Nikon's most expensive full frame body is $500 more than Canon's, which isn't significant at that level. Their most expensive crop camera is $400 more than Canon's, which is significant, but it is a bit newer. Their entry level full framers are the same price. Other than that, each has bodies that offer a range for interested customers.

Finally, because Canon is more in demand there seems to be greater price pressure on Canon retailers. I didn't include street prices, but if I did, that would likely give Canon a price advantage in most cases.

 

[ahsanford]

The only alignment that matters is cost. Which is currently like this:

5D s/r: $3,500-$3,700 (6/2015)
D810: $2,800 (7/2014)
5D III: $2,600 (5/2012)

D:500: $2,000 (4/2016)
7DII: $1,600 (10/2014)

Appreciate the list, but age/lifecycle considerations dramatically impact price.

Now if you segment by prices stated at the time they were released, things 'bucket' somewhat nicely:

$6-7K --> gripped Nikon D# and Canon 1DX# rigs

$3-4k --> Canon 5DS / Canon 5D# / Nikon D8XX / Sony A7R #

$2-3k --> Nikon D75X, Sony A7S #

$2k-ish (at time of release) --> Nikon D6XX, Canon 6D#, Sony A7 #

But even with that making some sense, head to head matchups go to hell that way. No way a wedding photographer with a $2500 body budget is seriously looking that the A7S II vs. a D750. For that person, they'd be lining up present pricing on a 5D3 vs. a D750.

So any way you slice it, it's more complicated than how any of us try to bucket it.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

But I write all this to make a point. The statement that 'Canon needs to keep up with [pick a model]' is a bit of a fallacy in that the competitors also need to keep up with Canon. Canon may be outperformed on the sensor front, but we might outperform them on resolution, or fps, DPAF, video, or high ISO performance.

In other words, denizens of a Sony or Nikon forum are quite possibly making similar 'grass is greener' / 'the next Nikon had better have DPAF' statements of their own, but they are simply aimed at different parts of the camera than the sensor.

- A

 

[slclick]

But I write all this to make a point. The statement that 'Canon needs to keep up with [pick a model]' is a bit of a fallacy in that the competitors also need to keep up with Canon. Canon may be outperformed on the sensor front, but we might outperform them on resolution, or fps, DPAF, video, or high ISO performance.

In other words, denizens of a Sony or Nikon forum are quite possibly making similar 'grass is greener' / 'the next Nikon had better have DPAF' statements of their own, but they are simply aimed at different parts of the camera than the sensor.

- A

and sales.

 

[romanr74]

The vast majority of members in this forum are not limited in their creativity by technology anyway...

 

[ExodistPhotography]

Now I know the vast majority of us here would rather see the 5D with a 28-32MP sensor and not sacrifice ISO noise performance or dynamic range. But we are not designing the camera and its likely be pushed more around 36MP by Canons marketing team to make the camera appear more competitive. And in a sense it will need to be since this camera should be competitive for the next 5 years. Now its is possible Canon may just keep it at 32MP. I personally would like that, lets hope they do and just keep the 5DS line around as the higher MP count variants.

That said I have seen some crazy comments here about 8FPS! LMAO.. Not going to happen for many reasons, mostly of which this camera is not marketed to sports or wildlife as it would take sales from the 7D2 and 1DX line.

The 6D will likely 24MP. If anything with the exception of the speed. I can see the 6D being the FF equivalent of the 80D in a mag body and about 6FPS. Which is very possible. The major selling point for the 6D is entry level full frame at an affordable price. So they will rehash current tech to keep the cost down.

 

[AshtonNekolah]

5DSR for me then a year or 2 latter ill get this chump of a camera for allot better price. the new 5D will not pass 35MP heck were lucky if it even passes 24.

 

[jrista]

Have things changed in sensor design dramatically recently ? If not then i presume that squeezing millions more pixels onto the same size sensor is a bad thing as far as light pick and pixel pitch with there being more gaps between the many more pixels. I want to see better high ISO performance not worse in a new camera personally and am not bothered by 4k video. Dual CF or faster SD is a must as is wifi, but pixels happy at 20-24 range. Think maybe they should bring out a 5DW for us wedding togs haha - we tend to recommend professional videographers rather than buying cameras with 4K - we have enough to do


Wedding Photographer North East & Yorkshire Northumberland & Wedding Photographer Cumbria

Gaps are dealt with via microlenses. That packs the vast majority of the light into the photodiode. We probably won't see over 60% Q.E. with a Canon sensor, but over 50% certainly. So there shouldn't be a problem with smaller pixels. Especially on a full frame sensor. I mean, the pixel pitch would still be 5.4 microns! The 5Ds uses 4.1 micron pixels, and most of the 20mp+ APS-C sensors are using sub-4 micron pixels.

Additionally, when you frame a picture...you care about the whole picture. From a total signal standpoint, the frame size is what matters, not the pixel size. On a normalized basis, on an equivalent basis, 10 micron, 5 micron, 2 micron, it doesn't really matter. You'll have the same signal strength in the end. Considering that smaller pixels generally have less noise, you'll even likely have the same SNR once the images are normalized.

There is absolutely no reason not to go with more pixels. Especially if the technology of the newer pixels is actually improved over older pixels (and if Canon hasn't improved their technology at this point, truly sad day.)

The only reason Canon hasn't delivered more megapixels outside of the 5Ds so far is they couldn't. Their technology just wasn't up to the task. They have a ton of patents for sensor technology that could potentially give the competition a run for their money. If they employ even half of those technologoes, 30, 32, 36 megapixels...shouldn't matter what they use, the results should still be better than the 5D III.

 

[unfocused]

Appreciate the list, but age/lifecycle considerations dramatically impact price...

...head to head matchups go to hell that way. No way a wedding photographer with a $2500 body budget is seriously looking that the A7S II vs. a D750. For that person, they'd be lining up present pricing on a 5D3 vs. a D750.

So any way you slice it, it's more complicated than how any of us try to bucket it.

No disagreement there. My point was simply that others on this forum use deeply flawed logic and explanations and then shoehorn selective data to support their pre-determined biases.

 

[bvukich]

Comparing on cost using current prices does is a bit warped.

Nobody expects the 5DIV to replace the 5DIII for $2600 - people are expecting a 5DIV for $3600.

It is the only attribute of the camera that changes over time.

Absolutely agreed there.

One way to look at it is that either the 5DIV price needs to be lower (to move it into D750 space) or it needs way more MP than 28 to justify its price next to the D810/A7RII.

Disagree here though. I think the $3599 on launch price is just about right. The 5D3 has (as the 5D4 surely will) advantages over the D810/A7RII, making it more attractive to me at least, regardless of price. And to those that need the resolution instead, there's the 5Ds/R at the same approximate price point (and probably a bit lower after the 5D4 launch).

 

[GMCPhotographics]

I would like to see 30MP (perhaps even 32).

I doubt that Canon will give us 9 FPS (at 30-32 MP) but 8 maybe likely.

At 30+MP, I will sell both my 5DM3 and 5DsR and go with the new 5DM4

I can only hope.

The 5D4's chipset is allegedly good for 240mp/s, so 30mp @ 8 fps is really very feasible from a CPU throughput point of view.

 

[tron]

I would like to see 30MP (perhaps even 32).

I doubt that Canon will give us 9 FPS (at 30-32 MP) but 8 maybe likely.

At 30+MP, I will sell both my 5DM3 and 5DsR and go with the new 5DM4

I can only hope.

The 5D4's chipset is allegedly good for 240mp/s, so 30mp @ 8 fps is really very feasible from a CPU throughput point of view.

240 also equals 24 * 10 making it a small 1Dx

 

[lloyd709]

There is no turn back to small number of pixels. This Canon should be competitive for next 2 years so It should have around 36-42 mp. Next year every camera even smartphones will have 20-30 mp.

That presumes that dunces* are defining the value of all types of cameras based on the number of pixels. This is somewhat/largely true on the lower-to-mid end of the camera spectrum (cell phones, point and shoots, Rebel-level SLRs, etc.) in which the buyer is much less informed than an enthusiast or professional photographer.

(*not remotely implying that you are, hear me out)

But on the higher end of photography know-how comes the wisdom to know that other things matter. In that light, though some pros need high MP rigs, many would be just fine with the 5D# line sitting on or around the 22 MP it sits at now.

And that would mean (gasp) that a 6D2 could sit below the 5D4 for price/features and yet outresolve it with more pixels. That userbase is closer to entry level and values pixels more than the 5D# camp does -- so give it to them!

I'm personally not opposed to more resolving power in the 5D4 so much as I'm opposed to the expectation that it MUST get more resolving power. I would argue the 5D# camp, if offered the choice of:

+2 fps / +2 stops high ISO / same 22 MP

Same fps, same high ISO as 5D3 / 30 MP

...they would overwhelmingly choose the former.

- A

+1000 These features would make it a small 1DX.

Agree. I've been making my living from photography for the last 15 years - doing what I would call light commercial work (basically what ever companies - largish brands mainly in London - through at me). Wait for the gasps now - I shot 99% of my work on medium jpgs and NEVER had a client question or complain. Time and storage space is money and these babies save on both!

 

[tron]

There is no turn back to small number of pixels. This Canon should be competitive for next 2 years so It should have around 36-42 mp. Next year every camera even smartphones will have 20-30 mp.

That presumes that dunces* are defining the value of all types of cameras based on the number of pixels. This is somewhat/largely true on the lower-to-mid end of the camera spectrum (cell phones, point and shoots, Rebel-level SLRs, etc.) in which the buyer is much less informed than an enthusiast or professional photographer.

(*not remotely implying that you are, hear me out)

But on the higher end of photography know-how comes the wisdom to know that other things matter. In that light, though some pros need high MP rigs, many would be just fine with the 5D# line sitting on or around the 22 MP it sits at now.

And that would mean (gasp) that a 6D2 could sit below the 5D4 for price/features and yet outresolve it with more pixels. That userbase is closer to entry level and values pixels more than the 5D# camp does -- so give it to them!

I'm personally not opposed to more resolving power in the 5D4 so much as I'm opposed to the expectation that it MUST get more resolving power. I would argue the 5D# camp, if offered the choice of:

+2 fps / +2 stops high ISO / same 22 MP

Same fps, same high ISO as 5D3 / 30 MP

...they would overwhelmingly choose the former.

- A

+1000 These features would make it a small 1DX.

Agree. I've been making my living from photography for the last 15 years - doing what I would call light commercial work (basically what ever companies - largish brands mainly in London - through at me). Wait for the gasps now - I shot 99% of my work on medium jpgs and NEVER had a client question or complain. Time and storage space is money and these babies save on both!

Then I guess you are extra careful/expert as far as exposure and white balance are concerned (as well as other camera settings related to saturation, noise and sharpness of the jpegs). But very practical indeed. I shoot many raw files and find myself overwhelmed when processing them (or not processing them since I am a amateur with no infinite available time).

 

[ahsanford]

One way to look at it is that either the 5DIV price needs to be lower (to move it into D750 space) or it needs way more MP than 28 to justify its price next to the D810/A7RII.

Simply saying 'the other companies have a definitive 'best' non-gripped FF rig, and the 5D4 must keep up with the resolution of those to justify its price' implies the 5D4 has no other discernible features than resolution and that Canon only sells one top-end non-gripped rig. Neither statement is true.

The 5D4 could come out with a 22-24 MP rig that mops the floor with the D810 or A7R II (or their respective next-gen versions) in frame rate and in low light performance. Imagine a 5D4 with 22-24 MP x 9-10 fps, 2 full stops better high ISO than the 5D3, 1DX2 AF setup, DPAF, anti-flicker, and (surely?) more useful video options than Nikon or Sony. That rig will get its $3000-3500 asking price without any hesitation at all.

And, of course, the 5DS is not exactly yesterday's news. It's still the highest res FF rig on the market.

So the idea that (a) the 5D4 is singlehandedly responsible for competing with Nikon and Sony standard-bearers and (b) resolution is the only way to do it masks a much more complicating market dynamic. I actually give Canon a ton of credit for offering side-by-side 'detail' and 'do-everything-but-detail really well' rigs while the competition chooses the simpler good/better/best model. We've got 'em surrounded!

- A

 

[ahsanford]

Then I guess you are extra careful/expert as far as exposure and white balance are concerned (as well as other camera settings related to saturation, noise and sharpness of the jpegs). But very practical indeed. I shoot many raw files and find myself overwhelmed when processing them (or not processing them since I am a amateur with no infinite available time).

I'm with you, Tron, I prefer RAW + JPG because I never know when I'll need a bailout on a slightly pooched shot.

The secret (for me, I'm no professional) is to avoid completism/perfectionism to avoid hoarding + processing all RAW files. My livelihood has nothing to do with photography, so I can afford to be a 'RAW file anti-hoarder' and only process (and keep) RAW files on the best 3% of what I capture. JPGs cover me for the rest.

- A

 

[ahsanford]

One way to look at it is that either the 5DIV price needs to be lower (to move it into D750 space) or it needs way more MP than 28 to justify its price next to the D810/A7RII.

Disagree here though. I think the $3599 on launch price is just about right. The 5D3 has (as the 5D4 surely will) advantages over the D810/A7RII, making it more attractive to me at least, regardless of price. And to those that need the resolution instead, there's the 5Ds/R at the same approximate price point (and probably a bit lower after the 5D4 launch).

+1. Well said in general, but the red bit above is critical.

What we're all scratching our heads on, of course, is how Canon will pump value into things other than the basic 'horsepower' specs like MP / FPS / ISO limits. How will they make the 5D4 sexy in non-sensor / non-fps ways other than 4K (which is effectively a common feature outside of Canon)?

Will it be something completely unexpected a la silent shutter with the 5D3, anti-flicker with the 7D2, etc.?

Will it be something mind-blowingly useful like a much better manual focus assist, EVF/OVF combo, swappable styles/options of back LCD screens?

Or will it just be a 'nicely appointed' 8 out of 10 at everything rig where Canon puts in the bare minimum to get $3000-3500 to leave our bank accounts?

- A

 

[drs]

33.18MP would make sense to me. UHD times four. ;o)

Seriously, the 5D initiated the "HDslr" age, it deserve to be the UHD leader here. But that would be in conflict with the C series, I understand. So back to stills, and please don't even bother with HD ;o)

Anyway, I look forward to the 5dmIV, as the 5D series is my workhorse, simple and good.

 

[LoneRider]

I'm with the Canon has a crap load to offer, when you take the features in the 1DXii, 80D and the new features found in the Canon Powershot G7 X Mark II (anti-shake, which is an extension of the anyi-flicker logic) in the DIGIC 7, there are a lot of features.

Again, in my way of thinking the 5Div will be the Jack of all, Master of weddings. It will have a kick ass silent shutter mode at 3-5FPS, normal speed close to, if not exceeding 8FPS, and 10FPS in live view mode.

I don't see it having more than 26MP, maybe 28MP, it might, but I would not count on it. It will ave DPAF and everything else the 80D, 7Dii and most of what the 1DXii has, possibly even a better AF engine than the 1DXii.

It will be a very compelling camera.

For the MP obsessed on a budget, I still think you will see the 6Dii hop past the 5Div, but without DPAF. It will be the D610-D750 competitor with ~36MP at 4-5FPS. With the 5DSii having, of course, north of 55-60MP.

I also believe Canon does not need a tit for tat solution to compete against Sony and Nikon. But it will sell 4 FF DSLRs that each have a definite calling.

Just as some weddings pro's will go for a 80D/7Dii, some may opt for the ~36MP 6Dii, but for the pros that want the best AF in the business, 5Div.

It is all semi-educated guesses at this point.

4 more weeks??

 

[ahsanford]

...
For the MP obsessed on a budget, I still think you will see the 6Dii hop past the 5Div, but without DPAF. It will be the D610-D750 competitor with ~36MP at 4-5FPS. With the 5DSii having, of course, north of 55-60MP.
...

I cannot see that happening (6DII having more MP than the 5DIV.) This is the other reason that the 5DIV needs more: to allow the 6DII to jump up over the D750.

I'm entirely on the fence with 6D2 vs. 5D4 resolution.

The purist in me would say 'give the prosumers the pixel count, I'll take the pixel quality', and especially recognizing that the 5D4 has the 5DS sitting alongside it, I could see the 5D4 staying low in pixel count and trying to crush everything else metrics-wise while the 6D2 gets a nice res boost to justify long-time APS-C shooters to make the FF plunge or to get 6D1 users to upgrade. In that light, I could see a 6D2 outresolve a 5D4.

The sad realist in me says that the (photography) internet will break if the 6D2 is given more pixels than a 'do everything' pro 5D4 rig sitting $1000+ higher in price. Because pixels. :

Were the 5DS never to have been offered, then the decision would be much easier. The 5D4 would be Canon's single end-all / be-all non-gripped rig and would be forced to pack more pixels in to compete in a traditional head to head capacity versus Nikon.

- A