More Specifications & Images of EOS 5D Mark IV

[Mikehit]

Olympus/Sony and Pentax. Two separate entities using IBIS so bringing up patent portfolio was a moot point. I'm sure a company like Canon can developed their own IBIS.

Pentax must be idiotic for putting IBIS in their DSLR.

Even third-party have lens stabilization, big whoop.

Canon have long acknowledged the usefulness of IBIS but they believe that for long lenses in-lens stabilisation is superior. And once you make that decision, then it makes sense to keep it in the lens for all other lenses.

Simple, really.

 

[Diko]

Canon have long acknowledged the usefulness of IBIS but they believe that for long lenses in-lens stabilisation is superior. And once you make that decision, then it makes sense to keep it in the lens for all other lenses.

Simple, really.

Where have you read that?

It sounds like them for two reasons: quality standarts.
And money factor: I presume that with prosumer bodies on average i owners have 2, 3 lenses.

 

[Jopa]

How this is possible this camera shoots MJPEG while the ol' good 5dsr (probably a worst camera for video) shoots h.264?

 

[rrcphoto]

Patent portfolio? How this relevant?

No one said one or the other. IBIS and IS in harmony for more stabilized axis.

you're joking right? how are patents relevant? if you don't have the patent and someone else does .. how do you expect to use the invention legally? do you think canon files all those patents yearly just for shi.. and giggles?

and you still missed the point. IBIS in a SLR is idiotic. if you stop and consider it for a moment you'd realize why. or should.

Olympus, Sony, Pentax...they use IBIS. So who's using the patent illegally?

Olympus and Pentax had their own patents, sony gained part of olympus's patent portfolio as part of the financial package they did with them years back. panasonic and olympus may share patents .. no idea.

usually each one of these patents finds "another way" of doing it as to not void the other campanies patents.

Canon and Nikon in their portfolios have VR / IS patents. no IBIS, so they can't just magically take apart a sony A7RII and "make IBIS" because they feel like it.

every piece of significant tech in these cameras are covered by patents.. that you can be assured of.

Olympus/Sony and Pentax. Two separate entities using IBIS so bringing up patent portfolio was a moot point. I'm sure a company like Canon can developed their own IBIS.

Pentax must be idiotic for putting IBIS in their DSLR.

Even third-party have lens stabilization, big whoop.

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

And Pentax? Yeah the company with a nonexistent customer base?

Consider you have a stabilized sensor and a non stabilized af, ae, and viewfinder.. IBIS is idiotic for SLR.

 

[M_S]

Olympus/Sony and Pentax. Two separate entities using IBIS so bringing up patent portfolio was a moot point. I'm sure a company like Canon can developed their own IBIS.

Pentax must be idiotic for putting IBIS in their DSLR.

Even third-party have lens stabilization, big whoop.

Canon have long acknowledged the usefulness of IBIS but they believe that for long lenses in-lens stabilisation is superior. And once you make that decision, then it makes sense to keep it in the lens for all other lenses.

Simple, really.

Then just lets be innovative and offer both. If a lens has stabilisation built in, then switch of IBIS. Make it a menu function with options "always on" otherwise or "manual on". Best of both worlds. Why not this approach?

 

[Mikehit]

Canon have long acknowledged the usefulness of IBIS but they believe that for long lenses in-lens stabilisation is superior. And once you make that decision, then it makes sense to keep it in the lens for all other lenses.

Simple, really.

Where have you read that?

It sounds like them for two reasons: quality standarts.
And money factor: I presume that with prosumer bodies on average i owners have 2, 3 lenses.

Discussion is easy enough to find.

https://photographylife.com/lens-stabilization-vs-in-camera-stabilization

 

[rrcphoto]

How this is possible this camera shoots MJPEG while the ol' good 5dsr (probably a worst camera for video) shoots h.264?

Mjpeg is for 4k, h.264 will be for 1080

 

[Wesley]

Patent portfolio? How this relevant?

No one said one or the other. IBIS and IS in harmony for more stabilized axis.

you're joking right? how are patents relevant? if you don't have the patent and someone else does .. how do you expect to use the invention legally? do you think canon files all those patents yearly just for shi.. and giggles?

and you still missed the point. IBIS in a SLR is idiotic. if you stop and consider it for a moment you'd realize why. or should.

Olympus, Sony, Pentax...they use IBIS. So who's using the patent illegally?

Olympus and Pentax had their own patents, sony gained part of olympus's patent portfolio as part of the financial package they did with them years back. panasonic and olympus may share patents .. no idea.

usually each one of these patents finds "another way" of doing it as to not void the other campanies patents.

Canon and Nikon in their portfolios have VR / IS patents. no IBIS, so they can't just magically take apart a sony A7RII and "make IBIS" because they feel like it.

every piece of significant tech in these cameras are covered by patents.. that you can be assured of.

Olympus/Sony and Pentax. Two separate entities using IBIS so bringing up patent portfolio was a moot point. I'm sure a company like Canon can developed their own IBIS.

Pentax must be idiotic for putting IBIS in their DSLR.

Even third-party have lens stabilization, big whoop.

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

And Pentax? Yeah the company with a nonexistent customer base?

Consider you have a stabilized sensor and a non stabilized af, ae, and viewfinder.. IBIS is idiotic for SLR.

It still proves my point; two separate entities.
Even a "company with a nonexistent customer base" can do it.

You still don't get it.
IBIS + IS can only get BETTER with stabilization.

There is no reason Canon can't add it.

 

[Wesley]

Olympus/Sony and Pentax. Two separate entities using IBIS so bringing up patent portfolio was a moot point. I'm sure a company like Canon can developed their own IBIS.

Pentax must be idiotic for putting IBIS in their DSLR.

Even third-party have lens stabilization, big whoop.

Canon have long acknowledged the usefulness of IBIS but they believe that for long lenses in-lens stabilisation is superior. And once you make that decision, then it makes sense to keep it in the lens for all other lenses.

Simple, really.

On/off for IBIS, like there is for IS.

Now that's simple.

 

[symmar22]

I was tempted by the 5DSR, but the outdated sensor technology (same as the 5D2 except for the pixel count) made me wait for the 5D4.

5DS/R sensor is actually better than both the 5D2 and the 5D3 sensor in every single image aspect: DR, iso-noise, color, anti-flickr, banding etc. + you get all the pixels, so harsh to claim Canon used 5D2 sensor technology for its 50 MPIX camera.

Anyway, lets see what the 5D4 can do. I'm hoping for +2 stops over the 5D3 based on the excellent 5DS/R sensor.

Agreed the images from the 5DS/R are cleaner, but it comes almost 8 years after the 5D2. One can expect that in 8 years, they have refined the tech to its best. The lower noise is due for a good part to the extra pixels that make it smaller, the banding has been reduced to the minimum, and the DR has been improved about a full stop, I don't deny the improvements over the 5D2/3, but it is basically the same sensor tech : no ADC, no DPAF and likely the 500 nm process (sorry if it's not the proper term, I'm not a native speaker).

The new sensor tech is what we are seeing in the 80D, 1DX2 and I assume in the 5D4. That's what I was waiting for.

The 5Ds/r is IMHO a 5D3 on steroids, the high res sensor being it's main feature, but the redesigned mirror mechanism is something I hope they have included in the 5D4.

My guess is that they'll have to bring the rest of the line to the new sensor tech standard, starting with the 7D2 that now looks a bit pale compared to the D500, and the 5Ds/r, before they generalize it to the xxxD/rebels.

As for video in the 5D4 (a feature I do not use), an idea would be to offer a specific grip à la Panasonic GH4 :

http://shop.panasonic.com/cameras-and-camcorders/camera-and-camcorder-accessories/camera-accessories/camera-batteries-chargers-adapters/DMW-YAGH.html

that could provide specific electronics to make it a video monster as well, along with an additional specific firmware.

 

[Cthulhu]

Re: Modified lever

I suspect that the modified lever on the picture may be modified in order so that people can advance AND go back with it. The one problem with the 7D2 is that the lever only allows you to advance forward.

If it is what it looks like, i.e. the lever on the 7d2 battery grip, it only goes forward

 

[Mikehit]

Olympus/Sony and Pentax. Two separate entities using IBIS so bringing up patent portfolio was a moot point. I'm sure a company like Canon can developed their own IBIS.

Pentax must be idiotic for putting IBIS in their DSLR.

Even third-party have lens stabilization, big whoop.

Canon have long acknowledged the usefulness of IBIS but they believe that for long lenses in-lens stabilisation is superior. And once you make that decision, then it makes sense to keep it in the lens for all other lenses.

Simple, really.

On/off for IBIS, like there is for IS.

Now that's simple.

No simple, but let that slide and look at the implications.

Canon's reputation has been built on long lenses for action and wildlife. It is the high-profile part of their business and they believe they are giving those photographers the very best by having in-lens stabilisation. So if they are not gong to change their current in-lens stabilisation (ILS) for shorter lenses then the only reason for putting IBIS in is to help people use 3rd party lenses. Is that a good marketing decision? Sony doing it has not exactly set the camera world alight so the marketing data suggests little to no benefit for them.

If they install IBIS and start to make lenses without ILS because the lens is smaller, those lenses then have a major drawback in that they will only sell to people with a body that has IBIS. In marketing terms, this makes them effectively non-compatible with the entire back-catalog of Canon bodies.

The third option is to build two production lines - one for ILS lenses and one for non-ILS lenses. Given that non-ILS lenses will only sell to bodies with IBIS initial sales will be low and overheads high. If you doubt that, look at the price comparison between the big MFT lenses and L lenses, or the price of Sony lenses compared to CaNikon.

So tell me, where is the 'simple' solution?

 

[Maiaibing]

and you still missed the point. IBIS in a SLR is idiotic. if you stop and consider it for a moment you'd realize why. or should.

Really? Please explain. SONY does this - hardly supporting your wild claim.

 

[Mikehit]

and you still missed the point. IBIS in a SLR is idiotic. if you stop and consider it for a moment you'd realize why. or should.

Really? Please explain. SONY does this - hardly supporting your wild claim.

IIRC correctly, the IBIS bodies are not DSLRs. Full frame, yes. DSLR, no.

 

[Otara]

and you still missed the point. IBIS in a SLR is idiotic. if you stop and consider it for a moment you'd realize why. or should.

Seemed fine in my old Olympus E510 DSLR, found it great to have that as well as the option for the IS Panasonic lenses. Whats the problem?

If you say its because you dont get VF stabilisation, you dont with type 3 IS in the Canon 500mm IS II either, and I use that pretty much exclusively now.

 

[Wesley]

Olympus/Sony and Pentax. Two separate entities using IBIS so bringing up patent portfolio was a moot point. I'm sure a company like Canon can developed their own IBIS.

Pentax must be idiotic for putting IBIS in their DSLR.

Even third-party have lens stabilization, big whoop.

Canon have long acknowledged the usefulness of IBIS but they believe that for long lenses in-lens stabilisation is superior. And once you make that decision, then it makes sense to keep it in the lens for all other lenses.

Simple, really.

On/off for IBIS, like there is for IS.

Now that's simple.

No simple, but let that slide and look at the implications.

Canon's reputation has been built on long lenses for action and wildlife. It is the high-profile part of their business and they believe they are giving those photographers the very best by having in-lens stabilisation. So if they are not gong to change their current in-lens stabilisation (ILS) for shorter lenses then the only reason for putting IBIS in is to help people use 3rd party lenses. Is that a good marketing decision? Sony doing it has not exactly set the camera world alight so the marketing data suggests little to no benefit for them.

If they install IBIS and start to make lenses without ILS because the lens is smaller, those lenses then have a major drawback in that they will only sell to people with a body that has IBIS. In marketing terms, this makes them effectively non-compatible with the entire back-catalog of Canon bodies.

The third option is to build two production lines - one for ILS lenses and one for non-ILS lenses. Given that non-ILS lenses will only sell to bodies with IBIS initial sales will be low and overheads high. If you doubt that, look at the price comparison between the big MFT lenses and L lenses, or the price of Sony lenses compared to CaNikon.

So tell me, where is the 'simple' solution?

You're making this more complicated than it should. Two, independent switches.

IBIS "AND" ILS = best stabilization
Not talking about giving up or stopping the production of ILS lenses for IBIS. It can be used together (e.g. Sony A7II, Pentax K-1)
Canon would never change a current ILS lens to non-ILS. It keeps the lens price higher.

Video people will find IBIS as a benefit...and I know there's a lot of them in Canon land.
Owners of non-ILS lenses can have some stabilization. Shorter lenses will have a lesser need for it proportionate to the focal length.

and you still missed the point. IBIS in a SLR is idiotic. if you stop and consider it for a moment you'd realize why. or should.

Really? Please explain. SONY does this - hardly supporting your wild claim.

IIRC correctly, the IBIS bodies are not DSLRs. Full frame, yes. DSLR, no.

Sony, there is the a77 / a99
Pentax K-1

These are not mirrorless.

 

[Mikehit]

You're making this more complicated than it should. Two, independent switches.

IBIS "AND" ILS = best stabilization
Not talking about giving up or stopping the production of ILS lenses for IBIS. It can be used together (e.g. Sony A7II, Pentax K-1)
Canon would never change a current ILS lens to non-ILS. It keeps the lens price higher.

Video people will find IBIS as a benefit...and I know there's a lot of them in Canon land.
Owners of non-ILS lenses can have some stabilization. Shorter lenses will have a lesser need for it proportionate to the focal length.

The reason Sony and Pentax have switchable IBIS is because their stable of lenses is small and on the whole not as good as the CaNikon. So to broaden the camera's appeal they created effectively an open platform. Canon and Nikon don't need to do that. And when Canon has 50% of the market as it is, how large will their additional sales be to justify the expense of researching and installing IBIS?

As I mentioned, Sony (and, as you say, Pentax) have IBIS that enables them to work with other manufacturer lenses but where are the hordes of people switching to use those bodies with Canon lenses? They are not there. So Canon look at this and it does not make economic sense.

As for video, I am not convinced.
Looking at MFTs, Olympus has IBIS with video and Panasonic has only just introduced it. The reason being that the heat generation with IBIS while shooting continual video is a significant problem so with Panasonic being more video-centric they decided it was not worth installing. And even now I understand you do not get the maximum video resolution when using IBIS.
FF DSLRs have a sensor 4 times bigger and the heat issue increases exponentially. SO they install IBIS for video and all the videographers start whining about how their video is no longer 64 gazillion resolution.

Simple? Not really.

 

[rushfan21122]

UPDATE?

Updated detail specs of Canon EOS 5D Mark IV:

Sensor: Effective pixels 30.4 million pixels, dual pixel CMOS
Image processor: DIGIC 6+
AF point: 61 points
Shutter speed: 1 / 8,000 to 30 seconds, valves, maximum flash synchro speed 1/200 sec
ISO Sensitivity: 100-32000 (extended sensitivity 50-102400)
Continuous shooting: 7 frames / sec.
Finder field of view: up and down / left and right both about 100% (at the time of the eye point about 21mm)
Rear LCD: 3.2 inches, Touch panel
Video: 4K at 30fps, FullHD, HD at 120fps
150,000-pixel RGB + IR photometry sensor
Anti-flicker
Built-in ***, Wi-Fi · NFC connection
Media: SD / SDHC / SDXC, CompactFlash Type II
Battery Life (CIPA): 900
USB 3.0, HDMI
Size: 150.7 x 116.4 x 75.9mm
Weight: 890g
Kit lens: EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM, EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM

 

[EScapture]

I think the new "Button" between the joystick and wheel is an two-way "Zoom Joystick" to check the images

 

[CincyFlyer]

Dual Pixel AF tricks?

It seems to me that if you have "dual pixels" in any given spot, they could be used to increase dynamic range (which would work better if one was several stops more sensitive than the other.) We'll see what they do ...