Canon EOS 5D Mark IV to Come Before NAB [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
scyrene said:
Well, I'm sorry, but it just happened that one smart individual started to talk about himself and not think about others. World is pretty big and it's very egoistic to talk things like "i don't need this feature and so that camera don't need that". Stupid.
Upvote
0
They are not but that is a total different market. For now Canon as a system is still a very good system but like i said before they have got to come up with a sensor that is close or matches the competition. When you are in a tech business you need to be on top constantly or you loose in the long run. The way it is now I have a strong feeling Canonis not competitive anymore in the sensor market.kraats said:
[/quote]
You can turn that around just as easily. The Nikon and Sony lens selection and flash system are 'good enough' for the vast majority of users so they don't need to do anything in that area to remain at their sales positions.
You don't have the slightest idea of the tech Canon is capable of, not a clue. What we do know is the tech they bring to market at the price point they set, and they remain market leaders at that even though they choose to use a lower tech (and cost) sensor. Seems Canon knows exactly what it is doing!
But all talk of tech aside, I might not be the average buyer but those of us with a level of knowledge above a complete beginner don't buy a sensor, or camera, in isolation, we buy into a system, and in many areas of a camera system Canon utterly obliterates any offering by any other manufacturer, and in many areas they have no actual competition.
Obviously the lens selection is a very personal thing, everybody makes a generalist foundation tool 24-70 f2.8, apart from Sony! But when you get a touch more esoteric, things like the TS-E24 MkII which is widely regarded as one of the best landscape and architectural lenses ever made, well Nikon have their PC-E24 but it doesn't offer independent shift and tilt and the IQ is woeful by comparison.
So if I want to shoot a generalists foundation 24-70 f2.8 with decent AF, the Sony tech is out. If I want to shoot landscapes, the Nikon 14-24 is bested very easily by the Canon 11-24 and the PC-E 24 has embarrassing performance compared to the TS-E 24 II.
See where I am going? You choose one specific metric of one component of a system and say Canon has to change it or die, I point out many metrics where other manufacturers trail behind Canon or don't even make a comparative tool, you say "that is different". So, show me a picture you have taken with just a sensor, and I will give you the time of day, or show me a picture you took with a Canon where you made an optimal exposure and the sensor let you down.
Upvote
0
unfocused said:
I know we are saying the exact same thing. The hope is that said in a different way kratts might get the point, he can't take a picture with just a sensor ;D
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
privatebydesign said:
Agreed. I would only add that I refuse to concede that Canon is "behind" in sensor technology, when those that make that claim selectively cherry pick the facts and ignore all the areas where Canon is actually way ahead of their competitors in sensor technology.
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:
True. HOWEVER...very, very, very, very, VERY FEW cameras on the market are incapable of acquiring focus on a consistent basis. There are misses...but there are misses with Canon equipment as well. I miss far more than I would prefer to with my 5D III and BIF or moving wildlife shots. The problem was even more severe on the 7D. It's not a high percentage, but high enough that I miss many of the "perfect" shots because they are just enough out of focus that I cannot use them...at least, not for anything larger than about a 4x6 size in print or on screen.
I find arguments specifically like this, about AF, to be rather odd. It makes the insinuation that any brand other than Canon cannot acquire focus half the time, which is patently false. Brands have been leapfrogging each other for a few years now with AF capabilities and performance. For a while it was the Canon 1D IV which was nailing it, then the D3 and D4 came along and did slightly better, then the 1D X did slightly better again, then the 7D II got similar AF capabilities to the 1D X, then the Sony A6000 brought a professional grade AF system to an $800 pocket sized camera with 11fps, and the A7r II is capable of rather high performance AF with just about any lens that can be properly adapted to it. The 5D IV will undoubtedly get Canon's iTR technology and join the ranks of the 1D X and 7D II in the Canon world. The next Nikon body will undoubtedly get further improved AF technology...
We don't have an AF problem. It doesn't matter which brand you pick, the same general AF capabilities exist in all of them. They all work quite well, and every single brand, in every single model, is going to have it's misses. As a long time Canon user, I can attest to the fact that Canon is hardly "missfocus free" here. I can attest to that fact and also claim I've verified the issue with one of Canon's most expensive lenses as well, as I own the EF 600mm f/4 L II.
So...when everything else works out. When metering gets the exposure right. When AF locks the subject properly. The thing that actually determines your IQ is the sensor. Canon sensors are good. They aren't top of the line in the greater market, but they are good. For those who need more, don't think that Canon has something particularly special in the AF department. They have some GREAT technology there for sure, but it isn't particularly more advanced or cutting edge than their top two competitors. Their competitors also have some GREAT technology there. You can focus fine with any one of these brands...but you can get better IQ if you need it, under certain circumstances for certain kinds of photography, with the other two when you cannot with Canon.
The one area where Canon excels in particular is their customer service. It definitely seems better with Canon than Nikon. I haven't had to deal with Sony customer service, so I cannot comment on it, however in every other aspect, Sony's photography division seems to be very customer focused. I hope I don't have to figure out what their customer service is like, and that the products will just keep on working.
When it comes to lenses, Sony MTFs are comparable to Canon's in most cases. Especially the white lenses. I was just checking out Sony's 70-200 f/4, and it's very comparable to Canon's. It's as good as Canon's 70-200 f/2.8 L II even. The FE lens lineup is also expanding rapidly, with eight new lenses on the way. I still prefer Canon class, I like their use of Fluorite in the superteles, and I am intrigued by their DO lenses...but Sony lenses, at least the higher grade ones, are certainly no slouches either.
Upvote
0
Ulric Wolf said:
Well, I'm sorry too, but in this case there were at least two smart individuals. Or was it not you who knew so well what other people will do, thus implying your opinion is kinda universal? Hellooo!!??
Upvote
0
Canon pricing on the 5Ds & 5Ds R I think shines a light onto what to expect from the 5D MKIV. My guess would be it will be identical in price to the 5Ds at launch with essentially the same AF, metering, anti-flicker, shutter etc. but higher frame rate, different sensor (between 28-36MP) and 4K video.
That means when the 6D MKII arrives it will have and new sensor, maybe 24MP, expanded AF points, the newer metering but retain GPS & Wi-Fi and likely be priced at the current 5D MKIII price. That then begs the question will an entry level full-frame camera slot in below and will that be a full frame version of the 80D?
That means when the 6D MKII arrives it will have and new sensor, maybe 24MP, expanded AF points, the newer metering but retain GPS & Wi-Fi and likely be priced at the current 5D MKIII price. That then begs the question will an entry level full-frame camera slot in below and will that be a full frame version of the 80D?
Upvote
0
jeffa4444 said:
I think you're right on these specs. I doubt we'll see any Earth shattering improvements in AF. The AF of the 5D3 is already very good and one can only think of incremental improvements at this point.
For the 5D4 to have some kind of leap in AF would require the 1DX2 to come out first and have some massive leap in AF.
4K should be a given. I could care less for it, but it is a market driven thing. No 4K would be a humiliation for Canon.
Shutter, FPS and all that along with the anti-flicker, menus, new view finder is probably the same or close to the 5DS.
It will all come down to sensor. Sensor, sensor, sensor. With the rest being small incremental improvements - there will be big expectations on the sensor. With the two big areas of importance being ISO and DR, in that order. Megapixels ain't where it's at. Especially since the 5DS is there for the pixel-peepers.
If Canon doesn't deliver big on ISO and DR, 5D4 is going to be pointless upgrade for anyone with a 5D3. Those still shooting a 5D2 or a 6D would probably be better candidates for upgrade.
I doubt it. It appears thus far that Canon has no interest at all in expanding into the FF-entry arena past the 6D. I think that is a shame, since Nikon does well there. I've beaten this horse many times, but it's the truth. From the perspective of a low-budget photographer who wants FF quality and needs a camera with other features - Nikon is much more appealing. Example, the D750. That camera is really jam packed with features and quality. It punches way above its weight for sure.
Canon seems perfectly happy trying to keep feeding the market place high end APS-C like the 7D2. The 70D has its place and I like that camera. It is a more appropriately featured and priced crop. It beats out the Nikon crops in every single way except sensor and slots (D7200), But the 7D2? Seriously, if the 7D2 did NOT have 10fps to make it a poor-man's flagship for action -- would it be worth it? No way. That sole feature is the identity of that camera. Because for a little bit more money, again you can go FF with comparable AF in the D750.
Upvote
0
unfocused
Photos/Photo Book Reviews: www.thecuriouseye.com
Truncating this to save space:
While I generally agree with many of your points, there are a few I would dispute or at least expand on.
I would not be surprised to see the 5DIV held to about 24-26 MP and let the 6D II go up to 28-30 MP. This is a logical move for Canon. With the 5Ds now available, there is no pressure for the 5DIV to have much if any more resolution than it now carries. I could very well see Canon holding down the MP count on the 5DIV to improve high ISO performance and then let the 6DII leapfrog it on resolution. This would keep the 6D II as a compromise camera, which is what it was designed to be.
I doubt if Canon worries all that much about having a better or equal autofocus system in the 5DIV as in the 1Dx. Despite what some on internet forums claim, Canon doesn't seem all that concerned about the latest model competing with an older higher priced model. (Note how they essentially made the 70D a better camera than the 7DI, long before the 7D II came out.) Whenever the 1Dx II comes out, it will still be superior.
Canon has invested heavily in refining and perfecting autofocus. I expect they will continue to offer new improvements until they reach the point of diminishing returns.
I don't necessarily agree that the 5DIV is "all about the sensor." At best any improvement in ISO performance and dynamic range will be incremental. But then, the supposed miracle Sony sensors aren't really much better either. Still, having seen the impressive improvement made with the 7DII sensor and reading the enthusiastic reviews of those using the 5Ds, I expect there will be some impressive sensor improvements.
I strongly disagree with your assessment of the 7DII. While the 10 frames/second is a major selling point, it is hardly the sole reason for the camera. I believe (and apparently Canon does as well) that there is a market for a APS-C mini 1Dx. Now, having said that, if the 5DIV comes out with 9 frames/second and improved autofocus, my 7DII is likely to see a lot less use.
K said:
While I generally agree with many of your points, there are a few I would dispute or at least expand on.
I would not be surprised to see the 5DIV held to about 24-26 MP and let the 6D II go up to 28-30 MP. This is a logical move for Canon. With the 5Ds now available, there is no pressure for the 5DIV to have much if any more resolution than it now carries. I could very well see Canon holding down the MP count on the 5DIV to improve high ISO performance and then let the 6DII leapfrog it on resolution. This would keep the 6D II as a compromise camera, which is what it was designed to be.
I doubt if Canon worries all that much about having a better or equal autofocus system in the 5DIV as in the 1Dx. Despite what some on internet forums claim, Canon doesn't seem all that concerned about the latest model competing with an older higher priced model. (Note how they essentially made the 70D a better camera than the 7DI, long before the 7D II came out.) Whenever the 1Dx II comes out, it will still be superior.
Canon has invested heavily in refining and perfecting autofocus. I expect they will continue to offer new improvements until they reach the point of diminishing returns.
I don't necessarily agree that the 5DIV is "all about the sensor." At best any improvement in ISO performance and dynamic range will be incremental. But then, the supposed miracle Sony sensors aren't really much better either. Still, having seen the impressive improvement made with the 7DII sensor and reading the enthusiastic reviews of those using the 5Ds, I expect there will be some impressive sensor improvements.
I strongly disagree with your assessment of the 7DII. While the 10 frames/second is a major selling point, it is hardly the sole reason for the camera. I believe (and apparently Canon does as well) that there is a market for a APS-C mini 1Dx. Now, having said that, if the 5DIV comes out with 9 frames/second and improved autofocus, my 7DII is likely to see a lot less use.
Upvote
0
unfocused said:
Well, let me put it this way...
Judging by Canon's past...
If other than the sensor itself, the 5D4 is essentially a 5DS - what then will be the main attraction?
There will be more expectations of the sensor and how it performs is my speculation. That and 4K.
Because if Canon is basically offering up a 5DS with more FPS and a new sensor - people are not going to be impressed unless the ISO and DR is improved by a stop. A stop would be fair. Anything less and there will be criticisms.
Well...if you take away the 10fps, what are we left with?
It is a semi-pro build quality, dual slot 70D with better AF and no articulating touch screen. Is the semi-pro build quality of any use in that grade of camera? Not in my opinion without the FPS. Dual slots is great, but for a crop camera, 2 SD is better. Lose the CF and save the space. The AF is nice though, I'll give it that.
70D already has DPAF. Same megapixels. Ok, so the 7D2 has ever so slightly better IQ due to ISO improvement. You have to pixel peep quite a bit to see the difference. It is almost the same minuscule difference between the 5D3 and 6D. Not worth talking about. 70D also has touch screen that articulates. Huge right there, making the DPAF a practical feature and it a real video camera. To me the DPAF is wasted on the 7D2.
7D2, better ergos...ok. Viewfinder, anti-flicker...nice features, but not deal winners.
Everyone will value the remaining features differently. But I can't help but think that without the 10fps, what is this camera? I feel the main attraction here is having a machine-gun on the cheap. Pressing the shutter on that thing is like pressing the accelerator on a fine sports car. But like a sports car, they are really only good at a couple of things. I've used the 7D2. Blazing FPS. Beyond that...it's a dressed up crop camera.
Upvote
0
All true!jrista said:
Quite frankly, I think that the market is moving towards convergence and just like in the good old days of manual film cameras, there really won't be much of a difference between brands...... and it is a safe bet that others will be using DO technology before too much longer. The days of the new camera being twice as good as the two year old model it replaces are over, Now we get excited over a half stop. We are getting close to the point where we can count each photon that hits the sensor and that leaves very little room for improvement. Many of the new lenses have MTF curves that look more like a cluster of straight lines at the top of the chart, so there is not much room for improvement there either.
AF is the laggard. Yes, they are all good, but they can be better. Tracking of moving objects is phenomenal now, and we are on the verge of tracking a specific individual or a BIF as it flies among the trees. Many P/S cameras already do facial recognition.... I really like the combo of touchscreen and AF on the mirrorless cameras and was quite surprised when it was not on the 7D2....
These are great times to be pushing the shutter!
Upvote
0
Don Haines said:
Aye, we have already converged quite a bit. It's tough to go wrong with any of the top three brands these days, and there are some great benefits to some of the close runner ups as well.
Lenses have indeed gotten excellent, across the board, from most manufacturers. Even the third party makers are creating some pretty killer lenses, often besting brand name ones in a few cases. That is pretty incredible, but I guess it also had to happen as the megapixel wars have ceased to even slow down, let alone stop.
Don Haines said:
Yeah. I have to say, I was originally quite happy with the 61pt AF system from Canon, but after a year and more using it, it still has the inter-frame jitter problem that the 7D had, just slightly milder (which may just be due to the fact that the frame rate is slower). I still lose a good deal of those perfect moments because the darn AF system won't remain locked. This is an area where I think the A6000 actually does better, but I need more time with it to know for sure.
I have played with a wildlife and bird photographer's 7D II. The AF there for tracking BIF definitely seems better. Maybe that is just the iTR, maybe it is also the higher resolution metering sensor and increased point count. Not sure, but it seemed better. If the 5D IV does NOT get the iTR technology, I'll be writing a very carefully worded letter to Canon about it, because that would just be a travesty.
I am looking forward to getting a chance to try the A7r II, however the weather has been so bad this year, and my sleep issues have gotten really bad again, so I've hardly been out, and haven't bothered trying to rent one yet. I really should try soon, as all the mountain passes will be closing within weeks here. :\
Anyway. I'm quite impressed with the AF capabilities of the most recent generation of cameras. Nikon's have had some great capabilities for some time, but their AF points seem to be rather tightly clustered. The Sony and Canon cameras spread them out a bit more, and both (at least based on my experience with the 7D II and A6000) seem to nail focus more often than my 5D III.
Don Haines said:
Indeed! I love the freedom to choose a variety of brands, and the freedom to adapt lenses with new mirrorless cameras. Certainly opens up the options.
Upvote
0
jrista said:
I have yet to see anything compelling that actually illustrates this capability. My experiences, which are admittedly small, and many of the videos I have seen, show that this just isn't a realistic option yet if AF is any kind of priority.
Sure you can fit Canon lenses on Sony sensors, but the AF gets much worse from what I have seen and experienced, they are certainly well short of a pro feature from a reliability and ease of use stand point.
For sure where AF is not a priority the choices are broader than ever, and a welcome change, but I think you are gilding the lily to far to great an extent at this point.
Upvote
0
K said:
Weather sealing. AF points spread better throughout the frame. I'd rather have 2 CF cards, myself. Anti flicker is a deal winner if you shoot under outdoor or indoor terrible lighting situations, particularly for sports. Those three are important to a ton of photographers.
And lets really put a big plus in the built like a tank column.. because this thing is Built.
Horses for courses. Don't need the features, don't buy the camera, but please, for those of us who want or need those features, we are not dumb for buying the camera. I didn't buy the camera for the frame rate, but it was a factor to tip the scales in it's favor.
I think the camera does many things well, depending on who is operating the controls, but that is true for any camera. I know they forgot to add the portrait and mountain icons to the camera, doesn't matter a bit to me, I still photograph both with it, and I'm pretty sure you couldn't tell it what camera it was.
Upvote
0
Anti-flicker is FANTASTIC!!!!!K said:
I shoot musicians in old venues, Anti-flicker caused me to go from 1 in 3 shots exposed properly to every shot exposed properly. It came out on the 7D2 and is on the 5Ds and the 5Dr. It is a safe bet that this feature will be in the 5D4, the 1DX2, etc
This is a function that (if you need it) is a game changer. For those who don't, just turn it off....
Upvote
0
Similar threads
