More Specifications & Images of EOS 5D Mark IV

[Wesley]

Think of shooting a person hand-held wide open... subject is swaying a little and so is the photographer. Each probably move more than an eyelash length. I shoot weddings... I'd welcome the new option.

If your focus is ruined enough by swaying a little than you shouldn't be shooting wide open.
Stop down and/or raise ISO.

Sheesh. I don't do tonnes of portraiture, but I've done enough - and used very wide aperture lenses with and without IS - to know that it's not as simple as you make out. First, wide aperture gives a look that many like, and cannot be replicated by other means. Second, with ambient lighting, it's quite easy to hit the practical upper ISO limit AND the minimum handholdable shutter speed EVEN shooting wide open. Any technological help with every aspect of photography is to be welcomed - the same attitude was used to dismiss IS, AF, automatic metering, and a host of other advances. They each have their place - for some of us, at least. Telling people they're wrong to desire a little extra leeway is pretty narrowminded.

If you're hitting the upper ISO limit and minimum handhold SS even shooting wide open than you really can't complain about ruined focus. You should know it was coming. At this point, I would be more worried about motion blur and the AF system retaining accuracy in that low light...

Use a monopod/tripod or HSS flash. More stable platform. Modeling light or speedlight infrared aid AF system.

 

[Wesley]

Think of shooting a person hand-held wide open... subject is swaying a little and so is the photographer. Each probably move more than an eyelash length. I shoot weddings... I'd welcome the new option.

If your focus is ruined enough by swaying a little than you shouldn't be shooting wide open.
Stop down and/or raise ISO.

Sheesh. I don't do tonnes of portraiture, but I've done enough - and used very wide aperture lenses with and without IS - to know that it's not as simple as you make out. First, wide aperture gives a look that many like, and cannot be replicated by other means. Second, with ambient lighting, it's quite easy to hit the practical upper ISO limit AND the minimum handholdable shutter speed EVEN shooting wide open. Any technological help with every aspect of photography is to be welcomed - the same attitude was used to dismiss IS, AF, automatic metering, and a host of other advances. They each have their place - for some of us, at least. Telling people they're wrong to desire a little extra leeway is pretty narrowminded.

Narrowminded? Nonsense – Wesley is clearly onto something. We should all just switch to P&S cameras so thin DoF is never a problem.

Instant film P&S at that.
According to the Amazon list, that's the top

 

[scyrene]

Think of shooting a person hand-held wide open... subject is swaying a little and so is the photographer. Each probably move more than an eyelash length. I shoot weddings... I'd welcome the new option.

If your focus is ruined enough by swaying a little than you shouldn't be shooting wide open.
Stop down and/or raise ISO.

Sheesh. I don't do tonnes of portraiture, but I've done enough - and used very wide aperture lenses with and without IS - to know that it's not as simple as you make out. First, wide aperture gives a look that many like, and cannot be replicated by other means. Second, with ambient lighting, it's quite easy to hit the practical upper ISO limit AND the minimum handholdable shutter speed EVEN shooting wide open. Any technological help with every aspect of photography is to be welcomed - the same attitude was used to dismiss IS, AF, automatic metering, and a host of other advances. They each have their place - for some of us, at least. Telling people they're wrong to desire a little extra leeway is pretty narrowminded.

If you're hitting the upper ISO limit and minimum handhold SS even shooting wide open than you really can't complain about ruined focus. You should know it was coming. At this point, I would be more worried about motion blur and the AF system retaining accuracy in that low light...

Use a monopod/tripod or HSS flash. More stable platform. Modeling light or speedlight infrared aid AF system.

LOL okay so you *are* narrowminded. Or just lack imagination... or both. We're not complaining about *ruined* focus. The OP said he'd like the feature to readjust critical focus by a few millimetres, that's all. If they include that feature, it will help with wide open handheld portraiture. Telling him - or me, or anyone else - that our technique is bad is missing the point. Sometimes people shoot wide open, handheld, not totally still subjects (or even if they are), and readjusting the focus by a tiny bit could help make some borderline shots spot on. Not to mention that the AF point selection isn't as find as it might be, and can easily mistake an eyelash for a pupil, or whatever (my experience with the 85L at f/1.2 was that many shots had the focus just a touch out - and this was not a case of AFMA, but rather that selecting the AF point over the eye was not fine enough of a distinction).

Additionally, newsflash: in lots of situations a monopod, let alone flash or other lighting, is not appropriate or allowed. This comes up whenever people talk about IS in wide angle and wide aperture lenses. I shouldn't have to give examples, but as I said above, you seem to lack imagination, so here are a couple: a party, where flash would be intrusive/alter the look of the shot (washing out ambient lighting), and where a tripod or monopod would be impractical due to space/crowdedness; or a venue in which flash and/or tripod/monopod is not allowed (say candid portraits in a cathedral).

Why do so many people think that photographers can control every aspect of the situation? Or indeed, why they'd want to? Sometimes you can't, and sometimes it's nice to blend into the background but still get good shots.

I'm sure you'll reply with something along the lines of, it's our handholding technique at fault next... (Let me guess, you don't use IS either?) :

 

[rrcphoto]

How can you know it outsell all A7's? It looks like Amazon separates DSLR & mirrorless sales and only shows ranking.

If Amazon is a good source for camera sales than I'm impressed a FF camera is in top 3.

the fact that it went on sale recently has alot to with that..

however I assume you aren't trolling .. but I'm really starting to wonder about some in here.

that is neither here nor there to the point though now was it?

 

[PureClassA]

Narrowminded? Nonsense – Wesley is clearly onto something. We should all just switch to P&S cameras so thin DoF is never a problem.

When you hit 20k posts, is Craig throwing a big party? We can play Pin the Tail on the Dilbert

 

[rrcphoto]

Narrowminded? Nonsense – Wesley is clearly onto something. We should all just switch to P&S cameras so thin DoF is never a problem.

When you hit 20k posts, is Craig throwing a big party? We can play Pin the Tail on the Dilbert

I thought we were all going to sit around watching our flippy mirrors..

 

[Wesley]

scyrene:
"LOL okay so you *are* narrowminded. Or just lack imagination... or both. We're not complaining about *ruined* focus. The OP said he'd like the feature to readjust critical focus by a few millimetres, that's all. If they include that feature, it will help with wide open handheld portraiture. Telling him - or me, or anyone else - that our technique is bad is missing the point. Sometimes people shoot wide open, handheld, not totally still subjects (or even if they are), and readjusting the focus by a tiny bit could help make some borderline shots spot on. Not to mention that the AF point selection isn't as find as it might be, and can easily mistake an eyelash for a pupil, or whatever (my experience with the 85L at f/1.2 was that many shots had the focus just a touch out - and this was not a case of AFMA, but rather that selecting the AF point over the eye was not fine enough of a distinction)."

The focus is ruined if you need to readjust, plain & simple. Even more so on a thin DoF portrait.
Does Canon not have the ability to fine tune the focus with the focus ring after autofocus did its thing?

Or maybe you're using single shot AF on moving subjects...

"Additionally, newsflash: in lots of situations a monopod, let alone flash or other lighting, is not appropriate or allowed. This comes up whenever people talk about IS in wide angle and wide aperture lenses. I shouldn't have to give examples, but as I said above, you seem to lack imagination, so here are a couple: a party, where flash would be intrusive/alter the look of the shot (washing out ambient lighting), and where a tripod or monopod would be impractical due to space/crowdedness; or a venue in which flash and/or tripod/monopod is not allowed (say candid portraits in a cathedral).

Party shots doesn't need pin point accuracy.
Are you really shooting portraits of someone in a cramped space that can't fit a monopod or tripod?
Candid portraits imply distance. You'll have enough DoF to not worry about adjusting focus by a few mm.

 

[Wesley]

How can you know it outsell all A7's? It looks like Amazon separates DSLR & mirrorless sales and only shows ranking.

If Amazon is a good source for camera sales than I'm impressed a FF camera is in top 3.

the fact that it went on sale recently has alot to with that..

however I assume you aren't trolling .. but I'm really starting to wonder about some in here.

that is neither here nor there to the point though now was it?

Went on sale recently? Seems you follow Nikon more than the Nikon owner

I don't use Amazon much. The T5 had the price slashed thing also so thought it was just a common retail sales tactic.

 

[3kramd5]

scyrene:
"LOL okay so you *are* narrowminded. Or just lack imagination... or both. We're not complaining about *ruined* focus. The OP said he'd like the feature to readjust critical focus by a few millimetres, that's all. If they include that feature, it will help with wide open handheld portraiture. Telling him - or me, or anyone else - that our technique is bad is missing the point. Sometimes people shoot wide open, handheld, not totally still subjects (or even if they are), and readjusting the focus by a tiny bit could help make some borderline shots spot on. Not to mention that the AF point selection isn't as find as it might be, and can easily mistake an eyelash for a pupil, or whatever (my experience with the 85L at f/1.2 was that many shots had the focus just a touch out - and this was not a case of AFMA, but rather that selecting the AF point over the eye was not fine enough of a distinction)."

The focus is ruined if you need to readjust, plain & simple. Even more so on a thin DoF portrait.
Does Canon not have the ability to fine tune the focus with the focus ring after autofocus did its thing?

Or maybe you're using single shot AF on moving subjects...

"Additionally, newsflash: in lots of situations a monopod, let alone flash or other lighting, is not appropriate or allowed. This comes up whenever people talk about IS in wide angle and wide aperture lenses. I shouldn't have to give examples, but as I said above, you seem to lack imagination, so here are a couple: a party, where flash would be intrusive/alter the look of the shot (washing out ambient lighting), and where a tripod or monopod would be impractical due to space/crowdedness; or a venue in which flash and/or tripod/monopod is not allowed (say candid portraits in a cathedral).

Party shots doesn't need pin point accuracy.
Are you really shooting portraits of someone in a cramped space that can't fit a monopod or tripod?
Candid portraits imply distance. You'll have enough DoF to not worry about adjusting focus by a few mm.

I guess those shots I deleted where focus was on lashes rather than eyes were my imagination.

Yes, canon has manual focus override, but if you want accurate DOF in the viewfinder, you need to use a focusing screen which is less than ideal for general use.

At the end of the day, I am not infallible. I have missed focus by enough that I didn't want to use the pictures. Slight adjustment after the fact would have saved them. Guess what? I also like that exposure and color balance aren't locked down permanently too. I've actually adjusted them! And cropped! Silly me.

 

[unfocused]

scyrene:
"LOL okay so you *are* narrowminded. Or just lack imagination... or both. We're not complaining about *ruined* focus. The OP said he'd like the feature to readjust critical focus by a few millimetres, that's all. If they include that feature, it will help with wide open handheld portraiture. Telling him - or me, or anyone else - that our technique is bad is missing the point. Sometimes people shoot wide open, handheld, not totally still subjects (or even if they are), and readjusting the focus by a tiny bit could help make some borderline shots spot on. Not to mention that the AF point selection isn't as find as it might be, and can easily mistake an eyelash for a pupil, or whatever (my experience with the 85L at f/1.2 was that many shots had the focus just a touch out - and this was not a case of AFMA, but rather that selecting the AF point over the eye was not fine enough of a distinction)."

The focus is ruined if you need to readjust, plain & simple. Even more so on a thin DoF portrait.
Does Canon not have the ability to fine tune the focus with the focus ring after autofocus did its thing?

Or maybe you're using single shot AF on moving subjects...

"Additionally, newsflash: in lots of situations a monopod, let alone flash or other lighting, is not appropriate or allowed. This comes up whenever people talk about IS in wide angle and wide aperture lenses. I shouldn't have to give examples, but as I said above, you seem to lack imagination, so here are a couple: a party, where flash would be intrusive/alter the look of the shot (washing out ambient lighting), and where a tripod or monopod would be impractical due to space/crowdedness; or a venue in which flash and/or tripod/monopod is not allowed (say candid portraits in a cathedral).

Party shots doesn't need pin point accuracy.
Are you really shooting portraits of someone in a cramped space that can't fit a monopod or tripod?
Candid portraits imply distance. You'll have enough DoF to not worry about adjusting focus by a few mm.

Wow! I wish I was better than everyone else and always got perfect focus when taking portraits.

I will readily admit that I often miss perfect focus on an eye. And, in many cases, I get one eye in focus, but another one not quite perfect, as my subjects seldom stare directly at me, but I often have then turn their heads slightly, so their eyes aren't always on the same plane.

And, to further show my own incompetence, that less than complete focus often comes when I've stopped down to f5.6 or so.

In fact, even when I stop down, if I am using a longer lens (70-200 mm f2.8 ) the depth of field I have to work with is very, very narrow. Another problem that I have, is that I am usually taking pictures of real people and I don't use a neck brace to hold them in position, like I used to do when I first starting taking pictures and all we had were daguerreotypes.

I like to get my subjects smiling or, even better, laughing. Not many people seem to be able to laugh and hold their heads in exactly the same position, they just seem to move.

So, while superior beings like Wesley may not find any need to ever try to sharpen an eye in post production, I need to do it A LOT! I use every tool I can in Photoshop and Camera Raw and OnOne, but I'd still be anxious to have Canon come up with something that can add another option.

 

[Wesley]

unfocused, what are your portrait autofocus settings?

3kramd5: There are tools and features invented that's readily available now to aid and increase keepers but I'm seeing only excuses from others.

 

[3kramd5]

unfocused, what are your portrait autofocus settings?

3kramd5: There are tools and features invented that's readily available now to aid and increase keepers but I'm seeing only excuses from others.

Why are those tools and features okay but a little leeway in post is useless?

Excuses? How about "I effed up"? Whether it's me or the camera or the model or a friggin cosmic ray, it makes no difference.

The tools and techniques suggested involve either gear which may be impractical or prohibited, or changing the look of the photo. Many clients like the very narrow DOF look in portraiture. Why else do world class portrait artists use moderately long focal lengths and wide apertures on large formats?

Shooting with wider DOF may increase the rate at which eyes are acceptably in focus, but decrease keeper rate because DOF is too wide thus the photo doesn't meet the aesthetic intent.

In any case, I'm not looking to increase keeper rate, I'm merely excited for the prospect of saving photos which are excellent in all aspects except focus is slightly off. I also shoot digital raw rather than instax. YMMV.

 

[dlee13]

One thing that I hope is included which hasn't been mentioned I believe is exposure compensation in Manual mode when using auto ISO. The 1DX2 has it so I assume all bodies would from now on.

The 5D4 certainly looks tempting for me but considering the price and my needs, I'll probably still wait for the 6D2.

 

[ahsanford]

One thing that I hope is included which hasn't been mentioned I believe is exposure compensation in Manual mode when using auto ISO. The 1DX2 has it so I assume all bodies would from now on.

That's not a guarantee for trickle-down-featurenomics. That feature as well as spot metering at the linked AF point have been deliberately withheld to the 1D line to date. For some reason, they deem that a flagship-only sort of feature.

- A

 

[Wesley]

unfocused, what are your portrait autofocus settings?

3kramd5: There are tools and features invented that's readily available now to aid and increase keepers but I'm seeing only excuses from others.

Why are those tools and features okay but a little leeway in post is useless?

Excuses? How about "I effed up"? Whether it's me or the camera or the model or a friggin cosmic ray, it makes no difference.

The tools and techniques suggested involve either gear which may be impractical or prohibited, or changing the look of the photo. Many clients like the very narrow DOF look in portraiture. Why else do world class portrait artists use moderately long focal lengths and wide apertures on large formats?

Shooting with wider DOF may increase the rate at which eyes are acceptably in focus, but decrease keeper rate because DOF is too wide thus the photo doesn't meet the aesthetic intent.

In any case, I'm not looking to increase keeper rate, I'm merely excited for the prospect of saving photos which are excellent in all aspects except focus is slightly off. I also shoot digital raw rather than instax. YMMV.

Because they are readily available now and not based on a guessing game hunch about a rumor.
Can you tell me exactly what dual pixels does right now?

 

[Wesley]

One thing that I hope is included which hasn't been mentioned I believe is exposure compensation in Manual mode when using auto ISO. The 1DX2 has it so I assume all bodies would from now on.

That's not a guarantee for trickle-down-featurenomics. That feature as well as spot metering at the linked AF point have been deliberately withheld to the 1D line to date. For some reason, they deem that a flagship-only sort of feature.

- A

You can't be serious lol...
How about changing minimum shutter speed when using auto ISO?

 

[raptor3x]

One thing that I hope is included which hasn't been mentioned I believe is exposure compensation in Manual mode when using auto ISO. The 1DX2 has it so I assume all bodies would from now on.

That's not a guarantee for trickle-down-featurenomics. That feature as well as spot metering at the linked AF point have been deliberately withheld to the 1D line to date. For some reason, they deem that a flagship-only sort of feature.

- A

I'm not sure why you think that but the 7D2, 80D, and 5Ds/5DsR can all apply exposure compensation in M mode.

 

[dlee13]

One thing that I hope is included which hasn't been mentioned I believe is exposure compensation in Manual mode when using auto ISO. The 1DX2 has it so I assume all bodies would from now on.

That's not a guarantee for trickle-down-featurenomics. That feature as well as spot metering at the linked AF point have been deliberately withheld to the 1D line to date. For some reason, they deem that a flagship-only sort of feature.

- A

From what I've read the 80D has exposure compensation in M so wouldn't that mean 5D4 would qualify?

 

[ahsanford]

One thing that I hope is included which hasn't been mentioned I believe is exposure compensation in Manual mode when using auto ISO. The 1DX2 has it so I assume all bodies would from now on.

That's not a guarantee for trickle-down-featurenomics. That feature as well as spot metering at the linked AF point have been deliberately withheld to the 1D line to date. For some reason, they deem that a flagship-only sort of feature.

- A

You can't be serious lol...
How about changing minimum shutter speed when using auto ISO?

I'm not kidding. Spot metering at the linked AF point is a 1-series only feature (unless your AF point just happens to be at dead center).

Auto ISO shutter speed is tune-able on just about all Canon SLRs, but only the 1-series lets you use Exposure comp and Auto-ISO in Manual mode simultaneously if I remember correctly. I am not a first-hand person asking for this in the 5D4 -- I never try to use all three of those simultaneously -- but apparently DLee13 (and some others on this forum) would want that in a 5D4.

(Someone please straighten me out if I've got that wrong. I only auto-ISO in aperture-priority in specific circumstances.)

- A

 

[neuroanatomist]

Auto ISO shutter speed is tune-able on just about all Canon SLRs, but only the 1-series lets you use Exposure comp and Auto-ISO in Manual mode simultaneously if I remember correctly. I am not a first-hand person asking for this in the 5D4 -- I never try to use all three of those simultaneously -- but apparently DLee13 (and some others on this forum) would want that in a 5D4.

(Someone please straighten me out if I've got that wrong. I only auto-ISO in aperture-priority in specific circumstances.)

Correct, it's a feature that was added to the 1D X via firmware and I use it frequently.