How can we improve on 5D3 to 5D4?
- Thread starter RLPhoto
- Start date
A built in condom dispenser because the 5D3 sure seems popular with the ladies ;D Or maybe it's just me 
Upvote
0
unfocused said:
Same here. There are a few things that could be improved, which have been covered in great detail by other posters, but right now I'm planning on skipping the next generation of the 5D line. The 5D3 will serve my needs for many years to come.
Upvote
0
3kramd5 said:
I assume as much; titanium and carbon fibre in any meaningful application does not change hands that cheaply.
Jim
Upvote
0
Orangutan said:
You probably found a tennis racket claiming to be titanium on amazon for 35 dollars. Machining a Ti tennis racket would be costly even if you re-sell unused material. You could machine one out of 12"X36"X.5" plate, and the raw material alone would cost on the order of $1000. Besides, titanium would be a strange choice for a tennis racket. There may be some Titanium in the racket, just like risc32 may have a carbon fiber or two in his (a Ti/Carbon hybrid weave? I call BS), but the majority of the structure is likely fiberglass.
Unfortunately, we live in a world where terms with literal meaning have been co-opted by marketing departments.
Upvote
0
Orangutan said:
I could be convinced otherwise but I expect marketing had more to do with titanium mentioned in the context of the racket than engineering. It could be titanium whiskers in the matrix of carbon fibers to essentially pin the layers together, in which case it would be a fairly small proportion by weight. (Then again it could be white titanium dioxide paint.)
Titanium sheet alone is miserably expensive never mind anything cast and machined from it.
The relevant question is whether either material would make a meaningfully better body; magnesium is affordable and easier to cast and machine than titanium. It also conducts heat and electricity well enough to be useful; titanium conducts both poorly. Carbon fiber isn't really suited to the job of filling fine details and supporting many threaded bosses.
I'd like everything to weigh less, but I'm pretty sure Canon's engineers have a solid grasp what works and is still reasonably affordable. I would dearly like to sit in on their brainstorming though...
Jim
ETA - If I was going to machine a tennis racket out of anything I'd try beryllium; it'd be heavier and your machinist might get lung cancer but it'd be stiff.
Upvote
0
My list, in order from most important to least:
- Make it a feature-for-feature upgrade from the 6D. This means:
- Built-in Wi-Fi
- Built-in GPS
- No banding problems at high ISO levels
- Add DPAF
- Add eye tracking
- Add 4K video
- Add auto-AFMA
Upvote
0
Jim Saunders said:
Chicken dinner to this man.
Jim Saunders said:
It would be very stiff, but if you hit the ground trying to catch a ball on the rise, it might break (since it's also brittle)
No need to worry about cancer; just wet machine it, like these:
Upvote
0
3kramd5 said:
I think he means 'Intelligent Tracking and Recognition', or iTR, using the RGB metering sensor - which does this far more accurately and reliably, for certain shooting scenarios, than the 5D Mark III ever could. The metering sensor also enables 'face detection AF in viewfinder. Exposure/Ettl based on face alone' -- which PhotoCat wanted. And enables spot-metering linked to the AF point as well.
Canon DSLRs below the 1D X have been behind in all these regards compared to Nikon for many years now.
What'd be great about them putting this stuff into the 5D3 would be the marriage of iTR/'3D focus tracking' (what Nikon calls it) with Canon's stellar dual-cross-type technology, and extensive use of cross-type AF points.
Upvote
0
jrista said:My list...designed to be the all-arounder:
- Histogram based on RAW *!* (screw JPEG!
- Higher frame rate (8fps, using CP-ADC for low noise, high speed readout)
- More dynamic range (high and low ISO...two stops low, as much as possible high)
- More resolution (~50mp)
- Layered sensor (drop the bayer! with binning capability, so I could bin 2x2, 3x3, maybe even 4x4 for very high ISO, as I'd rather have the SNR than anything
- iTR metering
- f/8 AF with center zone support (say 13 center af points usable at f/8)
- AF-point linked meter
- DPAF-automated AFMA (and, therefor, DPAF)
- Dual CF (w/ CFast2 support)
"iTR metering"?
iTR is the AF tracking mode that uses the metering sensor for subject recognition and tracking...
I must say, I'm quite surprised at the number of people in this thread asking for:
[list type=decimal]
[*]More DR at base ISO
[*]More resolution
[*]Spot metering linked to AF point
[*]Programmable Auto ISO
[*]EC in M mode (and while we're at it: in a less stupid implementation than the 1D X's)
[*]Face detection & tracking outside of Live View
[*]... and at least one guy asking for better subject tracking across the frame after initially choosing a subject (well that makes 2 of us now, since this is one of my wishes as well)
[/list]
So... I'm just wondering how many here realize that the D810, D800, and D750 already have every single one of those features...
Or perhaps that's the point - everyone here wants what Nikon already offers? Either way, it's kind of funny
I'm going to add one more thing to the list:
- AFMA for every single AF point, and then, yes, DPAF/CDAF-automated AFMA... b/c AFMA is already incredibly annoying as it is - imagine doing it for 65 points!
I want this b/c I'm finding more and more that you can't trust the factory calibration process to have calibrated every focus point perfectly.
Falk Lumo did some great work that showed AFMA inconsistencies across the AF sensor, on top of a skew that resulted in the left AF problem:
This is taken from his article here: http://www.falklumo.com/lumolabs/articles/D800Focus/SensorArray.html
Upvote
0
Perhaps just the few of us who've actually made the switch and learned what features our new toys, uhm, tools possess.sarangiman said:
Frankly, many of those cool features I rarely have use for. I merely moved to get much improved raw files for landscape work.
I do want to borrow a buddy's 150-600mm Tamron and try the D800's AF tracking for BiF shots.
I don't care if I don't have a high frame rate, just good focus.
Upvote
0
Aglet said:
Haha, well said.
Initially I'd wanted to switch for the RAW dynamic range, which is great for landscapes, as well as for exposure latitude in post-processing. But then I realized just how powerful all those other features are.
Particularly: subject tracking in 3D focus tracking mode. Which I never used on the 5D3 b/c it was far too unreliable, no matter what use-case I chose in the menu nor how I optimized any one of those use-cases.
But then there's also programmable auto ISO, which is so much better than constantly having to manually change the minimum shutter speed as I switch primes at a wedding (since the 1/focal-length rule is not always applicable).
And now b/c of the ease of EC in M mode with Auto ISO - and b/c of the incredible sensor performance - I rarely have to worry about blown highlights even in high ISO situations b/c I just dial in a massive amount of negative EC. In low light scenarios that'd require ISO 800 and above anyway, this usually means I'm not paying any shot noise cost by dialing in negative EC, since all it's doing is lowering the actual ISO amplification used (not changing the focal plane exposure). So, for example, instead of ISO 1600, EC -3 will use ISO 200. Since downstream read noise is low, I pay very little (albeit non-zero) noise cost compared to just using ISO 1600. Meanwhile, I gain 3 stops of highlight detail b/c of the lower ISO. I then selectively raise exposure in post, protecting highlights.
The funny thing is: if Canon were to properly implement EC in M mode with Auto ISO, I'd actually use it in an opposite manner to what I described above. In other words: to brighten the image (via ISO amplification) to near where I want the final image brightness to be, not to apply negative EC - since there *is* a noise cost to brightening in post-processing vs. raising the ISO in-camera. So one could make the argument that if any of these cameras needs EC in M mode with Auto ISO, it's Canon, not Nikon - with the latter you can just select your shutter speed and aperture, then dial in a relatively low ISO and then choose your exposure in post-processing via the exposure slider.
Anyway, I'm rambling now.
What Canon stuff do I miss?
I do miss cross-type points all over the frame, the wireless flash system, and some Canon glass, though. And sometimes I get the feeling that Canon's center AF point focused faster and more confidently in very low light than the D810 - which wouldn't be surprising. Although both systems are rated down to EV -2, the 5D Mark III is 'looking' for much more detail with its horizontal, vertical, and dual-diagonal sensors.
Upvote
0
dilbert said:sarangiman said:...
Falk Lumo did some great work that showed AFMA inconsistencies across the AF sensor, on top of a skew that resulted in the left AF problem:
This is taken from his article here: http://www.falklumo.com/lumolabs/articles/D800Focus/SensorArray.html
That looks like lens manufacturing issues to me where the lens isn't properly centered. Look at the recent lens testing on lensrentals to see how warped the light coming through the lens is. It would appear that this warping of light does more than impact IQ, it also impacts AF.
That is unless the above AFMA AF mapping is the same for every lens on that camera ... seems more likely to be a lens manufacturing issue than camera one.
Has anyone done a similar test for a Canon lens/camera combination?
Dilbert - I believe what Falk Lumo was showing there was the AF sensor miscalibration fiasco Nikon underwent with the D800.
I do know Roger's (incredible, laudable, and informative) work - yes, the PDAF sensors are making measurements from non-central light rays, and have to then be corrected for the image-forming light which uses both central & non-central rays. This is lens-specific, and also, at least partly, where AFMA comes in.
My point was: manufacturing tolerances are not so tight that you can assume that the AF sensor surface is perfectly flat, or that it's perfectly aligned compared to the image sensor. Therefore, different focus points may need different AFMA values for optimal focus, and who knows - this might vary from lens to lens as well. We really just don't know exactly what AFMA is doing, or the math involved, although some suggest it's a correction to that correction value that corrects for the PDAF sensor's non-central light-ray measurements. Which itself will be dependent upon the degree of spherical aberration for any given lens.
I wonder if Reikan's developer has collated this sort of data from people using his software... would be incredibly interesting.
Upvote
0
Much similar to what others already expressed:
1. AF point illumination during AI Servo
2. EOS iTR
3. Reduction of noise in higher ISO than current in 5D MK III
4. EC when using auto ISO in manual mode
5. Slightly higher megapixel up to max. 24
6. USB 3.0
7. Dual CF (CFast support) - I don't use the sd it all :-(
8. Higher frame rate up to at least 8fps
9. More dynamic range
10. Shutter durabillity 300,000
11. Improved quality of joy-stick (no chance it will fall off!)
12. Built-in GPS (I now have the GP-E2)
What I really like to have is the automatic AFMA adjustment in camera upon attaching the Canon lens to Canon camera (with zoom lenses in minimal 2 positions - wide and end)
1. AF point illumination during AI Servo
2. EOS iTR
3. Reduction of noise in higher ISO than current in 5D MK III
4. EC when using auto ISO in manual mode
5. Slightly higher megapixel up to max. 24
6. USB 3.0
7. Dual CF (CFast support) - I don't use the sd it all :-(
8. Higher frame rate up to at least 8fps
9. More dynamic range
10. Shutter durabillity 300,000
11. Improved quality of joy-stick (no chance it will fall off!)
12. Built-in GPS (I now have the GP-E2)
What I really like to have is the automatic AFMA adjustment in camera upon attaching the Canon lens to Canon camera (with zoom lenses in minimal 2 positions - wide and end)
Upvote
0
sarangiman said:So... I'm just wondering how many here realize that the D810, D800, and D750 already have every single one of those features...
Or perhaps that's the point - everyone here wants what Nikon already offers? Either way, it's kind of funny
Why is this insightful or funny? It's human nature to want what someone else already has. Or perhaps you're making the standard Nikon fanboi error of assuming that the body is the entire system. My guess is that a lot of Nikonians want what Canon already offers: great selection of lenses and accessories and high manufacturing quality (*cough* D610 *cough*). And the D810 is clearly a nod toward the 5D3's strength as an event camera.
Ideally, I'd like to be able to select the best components from each brand, but proprietary mounts and connections force us into brand lock-in. Depending on your particular style of photography, either Nikon or Canon will serve your needs better, but there's no harm or shame in wishing for it all.
Upvote
0
It´s kind of funny that on the day Canon releases the 7DII, this thread starts.
These threads tend to derail every time. We should have one common goal and that is to make sure Canon spend all their R&D money on the equipment we want. And instead we end up describing each other as DRones, Nikonites, Canonasses or what have you.
Yes, Canon´s cameras are probably better cameras than Nikon, but the sensor in a Nikon camera is better for most of our use, than Canons sensors are. Yes, Canons lens lineup is better than anybody else's, but I still want to be able to buy Zeiss lenses. Yes, Canons CPS is probably the best service in the business and I want that. But I also want at least the same quality sensor in my Canon camera as I could get in a Nikon camera. This is very very simple and it has nothing to do with being a Canonmonkey or a Nikonass. And please don´t reply with the crap statements about sales volumes etc. It´s a waste of CR space. The majority of those buying a DSLR does not even know that there is something called DR. And if they do, they believe it stands for Doctor!
Some of us wants a 24MP camera with splendid DR and high ISO performance. I wish you could get it. I want a 40MP body with splendid DR at lower ISO. Someone wants 4k video. I could´t care less, but I hope you´re gonna get it.
Some of the more agitated Canon sensor defenders here starts to sound like an antique arguing the slide ruler´s advantage over a calculator.
I am still able to live a happy life with my 1DX and 5DIII. But I was very disappointed when I realized that there was no 5DIV or 1DXs coming to Photokina, with a Nikon/Sony busting sensor in it ...
These threads tend to derail every time. We should have one common goal and that is to make sure Canon spend all their R&D money on the equipment we want. And instead we end up describing each other as DRones, Nikonites, Canonasses or what have you.
Yes, Canon´s cameras are probably better cameras than Nikon, but the sensor in a Nikon camera is better for most of our use, than Canons sensors are. Yes, Canons lens lineup is better than anybody else's, but I still want to be able to buy Zeiss lenses. Yes, Canons CPS is probably the best service in the business and I want that. But I also want at least the same quality sensor in my Canon camera as I could get in a Nikon camera. This is very very simple and it has nothing to do with being a Canonmonkey or a Nikonass. And please don´t reply with the crap statements about sales volumes etc. It´s a waste of CR space. The majority of those buying a DSLR does not even know that there is something called DR. And if they do, they believe it stands for Doctor!
Some of us wants a 24MP camera with splendid DR and high ISO performance. I wish you could get it. I want a 40MP body with splendid DR at lower ISO. Someone wants 4k video. I could´t care less, but I hope you´re gonna get it.
Some of the more agitated Canon sensor defenders here starts to sound like an antique arguing the slide ruler´s advantage over a calculator.
I am still able to live a happy life with my 1DX and 5DIII. But I was very disappointed when I realized that there was no 5DIV or 1DXs coming to Photokina, with a Nikon/Sony busting sensor in it ...
Upvote
0
