More Specifications & Images of EOS 5D Mark IV

[zim]

Wee holes below the "Mark IV" pheeeewwww......... ;D

 

[vishaltpt]

Issues with 5D4 as a general purpose all round camera:

1. No Flip screen. The flippy is so convenient for video. Great for overhead shots in protests, crowd. Great for doing full length portraits.
2. No 120 fps at FHD. What!!! Sony , Panasonic put that in their cameras decades back. 120 fps is real slomo not 60 fps. Canon wake up! Its 2016. We want a serious, creative tool.
3. Moderate conservative 30mp. Not great for landscape work, detailed studio portraiture, cropping in post.
4. Poor video codecs. 8 bit. Not broadcast quality video specs. GH4 & A7s2 are way better tools for video work.
5. No focus peaking.
6. No zebra.
7. Horribly low 1/125 sync speed. Very limiting.
8. No IBIS stabilization.
9. Built in LPF reduces sharpness of images. Medium Format is loved for that besides the smooth tonal gradations & 16 bit.
10. DR less than the competition.

All in all ; as previously said it is a very “Yesterday Camera" on all the specs than a “Tomorrow” one. Can it last another 4 years.You bet.

There is nothing new here. Just better AF maybe. That’s it. For majority of Pros who shoot video on manual focus fancy names like ‘dual pixel this’ & ‘dual pixel that’ doesn’t make sense. Likewise for Stills the Competition offers better IQ.

 

[DrToast]

Wish a new grip wasn't necessary.

 

[tr573]

Issues with 5D4 as a general purpose all round camera:

7. Horribly low 1/125 sync speed. Very limiting.

Wait, what? Where in the world did this come from?

 

[Sator]

That expression Google translated as "ever possible to no post-processing of the adjustment dual pixel RAW file" is "これまでに無い後処理の調整が可能なデュアルピクセルRAWファイル" which might be better translated as "Editable Dual Pixel RAW files (a feature which was previously unavailable up to now)"

Still not completely clear on what this means, but I wonder if this is the new feature they're talking about. It claims it's a never before done feature.

I can see how you might wringe this reading out of this passage, but I think it is written in typical Japanese hyperbolic promotional language. I would not read too much into it as other are doing.

これまでに無い=previously non-existent

後処理の調整=adjustments in post-processing

が可能な=which are made/rendered (ie adjustments in post-processing) possible

デュアルピクセルRAWファイル=dual pixel RAW file

That is why if had been hired as the translator I would translate that as "dual pixel RAW files open up previously unobtainable degrees of latitude in post-production processing". Or more literally "dual pixel RAW files opens up possibilities in post-processing adjustments that previously never existed".

If you wanted to say "editable dual pixels" in Japanese it would be better to say 直接調整が可能なデュアルピクセルRAWファイル implying that direct editing at pixel level is possible. But I do not think that is at all what is being implied here. It is clearly more a case of the files offering greater latitude in post. It may be little more than a hyperbolic way of saying that you can recover shadows better.

 

[rcarca]

Issues with 5D4 as a general purpose all round camera:

7. Horribly low 1/125 sync speed. Very limiting.

Wait, what? Where in the world did this come from?

Quite! He might be right, but I cannot read that into the details on the listing!!! And why on earth would they move to IBIS given the legacy of their lenses???

 

[StoneColdCoffee]

Thanks CR for piecing all those Rumors together ;D ...any Guestimates on what the Pixel size would be for us Astrophotographers

 

[gsealy]

Issues with 5D4 as a general purpose all round camera:

1. No Flip screen. The flippy is so convenient for video. Great for overhead shots in protests, crowd. Great for doing full length portraits.
2. No 120 fps at FHD. What!!! Sony , Panasonic put that in their cameras decades back. 120 fps is real slomo not 60 fps. Canon wake up! Its 2016. We want a serious, creative tool.
3. Moderate conservative 30mp. Not great for landscape work, detailed studio portraiture, cropping in post.
4. Poor video codecs. 8 bit. Not broadcast quality video specs. GH4 & A7s2 are way better tools for video work.
5. No focus peaking.
6. No zebra.
7. Horribly low 1/125 sync speed. Very limiting.
8. No IBIS stabilization.
9. Built in LPF reduces sharpness of images. Medium Format is loved for that besides the smooth tonal gradations & 16 bit.
10. DR less than the competition.

All in all ; as previously said it is a very “Yesterday Camera" on all the specs than a “Tomorrow” one. Can it last another 4 years.You bet.

There is nothing new here. Just better AF maybe. That’s it. For majority of Pros who shoot video on manual focus fancy names like ‘dual pixel this’ & ‘dual pixel that’ doesn’t make sense. Likewise for Stills the Competition offers better IQ.

I think the thing is that Canon COULD put more into the camera, but they just don't. They are always holding back a bit. I look at the updated specs and I continue to come away with the notion that, for me, spending the $3500 or so is not worth it as an upgrade over what I already have. I really would like to buy the 5DIV from an emotional point of view and money is not an issue, but I can't bring myself to do it based on logical, analytical thinking. I can wait. Technology is changing fast and there are lots of new cameras coming out.

 

[rcarca]

I think the thing is that Canon COULD put more into the camera, but they just don't. They are always holding back a bit.

Sure: they could put a lot more AND make it a loss leader and a lot of us here might be even happier. I doubt that will happen!!! (I almost wrote "all of us here" and then remembered I was on CR...)

 

[George D.]

I don't know about post-processing capability but in-camera JPEG needs to be seriously improved.

 

[neuroanatomist]

That expression Google translated as "ever possible to no post-processing of the adjustment dual pixel RAW file" is "これまでに無い後処理の調整が可能なデュアルピクセルRAWファイル" which might be better translated as "Editable Dual Pixel RAW files (a feature which was previously unavailable up to now)"

Still not completely clear on what this means, but I wonder if this is the new feature they're talking about. It claims it's a never before done feature.

Could it be: A set of two modes. Either 30 MP High DR RAW file mode and 60 MP Low/regular DR RAW file mode.

A 60 MP mode that produces images with a 3:1 aspect ratio. Pano mode?

Well hang on, wouldn't it be 3:1, but with pixels that are twice as high as they are wide (ie. 3:1 pixel ratio, but 3:2 total area ratio)

Sure, that would work great on all of those devices with displays they have rectangular pixels. How many of those do you have?

We all have displays with pixels arranged in a rectangular grid. Rectangular with all sides equally long for that matter. But you don't have to have PAR (pixel aspect ratio) match DAR (display aspect ratio). If you have a DVD player hooked up to a TV manufactured in the last 5 years you're displaying non-square pixels on a square-pixel display.

Up until ITU Rec. 709 became the default spec to build consumer sets against, this was all we had for TV. TV pixel aspect ratio has traditionally (Rec 601) been 10:11 for 480i signals and 59:54 for 567i. For 4:3 display aspect ratio. Because of luma channel transmission bandwidth reasons. It wasn't until the world finally managed to agree on the HD specs that we got square pixels outside of the computer domain.

Ok, squares are technically rectangles. They're both quadrilaterals, and polygons, too...

His point – "pixels that are twice as high as they are wide" – is individual pixels with a 2:1 aspect ratio. A somewhat bigger difference than you're discussing.

 

[midluk]

That is why if had been hired as the translator I would translate that as "dual pixel RAW files open up previously unobtainable degrees of latitude in post-production processing". Or more literally "dual pixel RAW files opens up possibilities in post-processing adjustments that previously never existed".

If you wanted to say "editable dual pixels" in Japanese it would be better to say 直接調整が可能なデュアルピクセルRAWファイル implying that direct editing at pixel level is possible. But I do not think that is at all what is being implied here. It is clearly more a case of the files offering greater latitude in post. It may be little more than a hyperbolic way of saying that you can recover shadows better.

So the dual pixel part of this point may just be to make it sound cool in marketing and it really is just plain 16 bit raw.

 

[wockawocka]

Issues with 5D4 as a general purpose all round camera:



7. Horribly low 1/125 sync speed. Very limiting.

Source? Because if true my decision is made for me.

 

[Talley]

Also notice on the top screen ISO 32,000

This will be the top limit of AUTO ISO and tells me that 25,600 will be more than usable now. If you take a look at the past:

5D3: 25,600
7D2: 16,000
1DX/2: 51,200
60D: 6400
7D: 6400
70D: 12,800
80D: 16,000
6D: 25,600

The advertising image of the top of the camera for all these cameras have shown the auto ISO upper limit. Previously that meant on the 5D3 the 25,600 and 1DX of 51,200 most felt that to be the absolute max borderline unsuable setting type thing. But many say that Canon placed these settings at the right mark and this is an indication that we'll see 1/3 stop improvement at the HIGH ISO side.... not including the base ISO DR improvement (which we don't know what that is yet but look at the 80D/1dx2 for indication)

 

[vjlex]

That expression Google translated as "ever possible to no post-processing of the adjustment dual pixel RAW file" is "これまでに無い後処理の調整が可能なデュアルピクセルRAWファイル" which might be better translated as "Editable Dual Pixel RAW files (a feature which was previously unavailable up to now)"

Still not completely clear on what this means, but I wonder if this is the new feature they're talking about. It claims it's a never before done feature.

I can see how you might wringe this reading out of this passage, but I think it is written in typical Japanese hyperbolic promotional language. I would not read too much into it as other are doing.

これまでに無い=previously non-existent

後処理の調整=adjustments in post-processing

が可能な=which are made/rendered (ie adjustments in post-processing) possible

デュアルピクセルRAWファイル=dual pixel RAW file

That is why if had been hired as the translator I would translate that as "dual pixel RAW files open up previously unobtainable degrees of latitude in post-production processing". Or more literally "dual pixel RAW files opens up possibilities in post-processing adjustments that previously never existed".

If you wanted to say "editable dual pixels" in Japanese it would be better to say 直接調整が可能なデュアルピクセルRAWファイル implying that direct editing at pixel level is possible. But I do not think that is at all what is being implied here. It is clearly more a case of the files offering greater latitude in post. It may be little more than a hyperbolic way of saying that you can recover shadows better.

Thanks! I like your translation better. I tend to do more literal translations when I can't be exactly sure what nuance they're going for. But yours is a good fit. I especially like "opens up new possibilities" for "これまでに無い~が可能な".

 

[unfocused]

That expression Google translated as "ever possible to no post-processing of the adjustment dual pixel RAW file" is "これまでに無い後処理の調整が可能なデュアルピクセルRAWファイル" which might be better translated as "Editable Dual Pixel RAW files (a feature which was previously unavailable up to now)"

I can see how you might wringe this reading out of this passage, but I think it is written in typical Japanese hyperbolic promotional language. I would not read too much into it as other are doing.

これまでに無い=previously non-existent

後処理の調整=adjustments in post-processing

が可能な=which are made/rendered (ie adjustments in post-processing) possible

デュアルピクセルRAWファイル=dual pixel RAW file

That is why if had been hired as the translator I would translate that as "dual pixel RAW files open up previously unobtainable degrees of latitude in post-production processing". Or more literally "dual pixel RAW files opens up possibilities in post-processing adjustments that previously never existed"...

.... It is clearly more a case of the files offering greater latitude in post. It may be little more than a hyperbolic way of saying that you can recover shadows better.

Finally, some sanity here.

As Neuro pointed out earlier "Thomas" really doesn't know how Canon's dual pixel autofocus sensors work.

Let's all also try to keep in mind that the rumored feature that was supposed to be completely new to a DSLR was in fact a rumor. Too many times, people actually believe what they read on the Internet.

 

[Diko]

3. Moderate conservative 30mp. Not great for landscape work, detailed studio portraiture, cropping in post.

General purpose is NOT like All-in-One

4. Poor video codecs. 8 bit. Not broadcast quality video specs. GH4 & A7s2 are way better tools for video work.

I am sure if possible ML WILL enable 2k video at least. That is if the heating issues are not that much of an obstacle.

5. No focus peaking.
6. No zebra.
7. Horribly low 1/125 sync speed. Very limiting.
10. DR less than the competition.

Man, do you realize we are on rumor level. Do you bet your 1-year income on those claims of lack of the above mentioned features?

And I really don't understand where did especially this 1/125 come. And I still don't understand people that complain where there is high speed flash. I use it with my radio flash adaptors all the time. Up to 1/4000th I believe it was... The taxation is on the battery, of course.

8. No IBIS stabilization.

I still here people that complain from LENSE stabilization and you talk about body one. I am pretty confident that they have nothing to offer in a descent quality within the body as a stabilization solution. However I must admit that CANON might not want to have to sell only single version of their glasses.

9. Built in LPF reduces sharpness of images. Medium Format is loved for that besides the smooth tonal gradations & 16 bit.

Well did you just compared a MF with FF?!? I just stopped taking you seriously.


I find the Canon 5D M4 quite on current track with not so ground-breaking new techs. Since this all is only on the plane of rumors I admit I might be wrong for the latter.

 

[neuroanatomist]

9. Built in LPF reduces sharpness of images. Medium Format is loved for that besides the smooth tonal gradations & 16 bit.

Well did you just compared a MF with FF?!? I just stopped taking you seriously.

Really, it took you until his 9th point to stop taking him seriously?

 

[Diko]

..... His point – "pixels that are twice as high as they are wide" – is individual pixels with a 2:1 aspect ratio. A somewhat bigger difference than you're discussing.

Finally I understood what you have missunderstood on what I might have written too briefly

My fault!

What I meant was double the count of the pixels, not the dimensions of the pixels. ;-)

 

[Diko]

Please feel free to comment and correct what I have put together in the last 15 min. And to correct my observations.

EDIT: Aside from the front cable opening.