More Specifications & Images of EOS 5D Mark IV

[skyoctane]

must have the precious

 

[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.

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

Got it. Still, a 30 MP sensor with a 3:2 aspect ratio would yield images of approximately 6750x4500. If you're doubling the count of the pixels with the dual pixels which are all split along the same (vertical) axis, that resulting 60 MP image becomes 13500x4500. When you display such an image on any typical display (camera LCD, phone, monitor, TV) it's going to display as a 3:1 image.

Phew.... I forgot their order. True. Indeed. Maybe indeed it's all about higher DR in the end.

 

[jeffa4444]

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.

1. No flippy Screen - I have one on my OM-D E-M10, rarely use it. For landscape Wi-Fi to your iPhone or ipad with live view far more useful. For studio cable to lap top makes it redundant
2. The only good 120fps comes from the likes of Red & Arri not the toys from Panasonic or Sony.
3. Buy a 5DS great for landscape & Studio. One size doesn't fit all
4. 5.6. Why buy a DSLR for Video. Serious video shooters don't, period
As for your other points you clearly don't get out more often & take photographs. We don't know the claimed DR yet of the 5D MKIV so your just making assumptions.

With respect the 5D MKIV is not aimed at you, but for others it will be the successor to other well engineered canon cameras coupled to class leading optics.

 

[PureClassA]

..... 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.

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

Got it. Still, a 30 MP sensor with a 3:2 aspect ratio would yield images of approximately 6750x4500. If you're doubling the count of the pixels with the dual pixels which are all split along the same (vertical) axis, that resulting 60 MP image becomes 13500x4500. When you display such an image on any typical display (camera LCD, phone, monitor, TV) it's going to display as a 3:1 image.

Phew.... I forgot their order. True. Indeed. Maybe indeed it's all about higher DR in the end.

I dont think it would ever be displayed like that. I suspect that's what the new RAW format has embedded whereby you'll need to use Canon DPP to translate a shot taken with this feature enabled back into the 6750x4500 aspect ratio once it recombined each pair of sub-pixels in DPAF.

 

[ahsanford]

Issues with 5D4 as a general purpose all round camera:
5. No focus peaking.
6. No zebra.

Well, it's an SLR with a vanilla optical viewfinder. Sorry.
Unless you were referring to LiveView, in which case, you have no idea what features LV will have at this point.
#shush

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

This has not been posted here or corroborated elsewhere. You appear to have made this up.

10. DR less than the competition.

Now you're just trolling. You have no possible way of knowing this. In fact, the dual-pixel mojo (if it's what we think it is) could give us exposure latitude the likes of which we've never seen. Again, we have no idea, and to state that we do is nuts.

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.

You have conflated Dual Pixel AF with Dual Pixel Raw (or whatever the translation is calling it). One is for focusing. The other is the big new innovation this product is offering this photography world, and it could be pretty damn awesome. We shall see.

- A

 

[freejay]

I'm pretty sure that this "Dual Pixel raw" thing will be a possibility to use the sensor's distance/sharpness data later in DPP (or if later implemented in Lightroom for example) to do corrections/effects only in unsharp or sharp, close or far away parts of the picture.

Reading all of the translations, I suspect that what will happen is that the AF pixel part of DPAF will be used to reduce noise from the primary color pixel.

That could also be the case. But then: Why not do it in camera and already deliver better DR but do it in "post processing" (if translations are correct)?

Reduction of noise in camera allows greater lattitude when editing images in post processing.

Sounds reasonable. But then (again ;-) : Where's the announced function, that has never been seen in a DSLR? Using all available pixels for best possible DR doesn't seem to be something unique...

 

[PureClassA]

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

This has not been posted here or corroborated elsewhere. You appear to have made this up.

Canon 5D3 sync speed is 1/200. Whoever told you the 5D4 is REDUCING the sync speed by nearly half is on some heavy medications. Or trolling

 

[Diko]

Well, it's an SLR with a vanilla optical viewfinder...

What is that?

 

[PureClassA]

Well, it's an SLR with a vanilla optical viewfinder...

What is that?

You've never licked your viewfinder window before obviously...

 

[ahsanford]

Well, it's an SLR with a vanilla optical viewfinder...

What is that?

I'm 'speaking American' again, sorry. Vanilla = there's nothing out of the ordinary about it, and it won't focus peak / zebra through the viewfinder... because by definition it's an OVF (we strongly presume) without an EVF overlay.

- A

 

[naylor83]

I'm totally confused about this new "dual pixel" feature. Don't know what to believe any more.

I didn't quite understand the technical reason why separated pixel halves would give more DR than combining them (as previously in 7D2, 70D, 80D) in-camera?

 

[3kramd5]

Well, it's an SLR with a vanilla optical viewfinder...

What is that?

I'm 'speaking American' again, sorry. Vanilla = there's nothing out of the ordinary about it, and it won't focus peak / zebra through the viewfinder... because by definition it's an OVF (we strongly presume) without an EVF overlay.

- A

It's a pretty weird colloquialism when you think about it. It's not as if the default flavor of anything is vanilla. You need vanilla beans to make vanilla just like you need cocoa beans to make chocolate!

 

[3kramd5]

...
Perhaps I misunderstand DPAF, but I thought all pixels were used for both phase detection (i.e. contributing to AF) and luminance (e.g. color once one considers the CFA).

Are you saying there are discrete AF pixels?

If there isn't then why would Canon make the big deal about it?

Because it allows every photosite to contribute both AF and imaging information. If the AF pixels only serve AF, there's nothing special about it.

 

[naylor83]

...
Perhaps I misunderstand DPAF, but I thought all pixels were used for both phase detection (i.e. contributing to AF) and luminance (e.g. color once one considers the CFA).

Are you saying there are discrete AF pixels?

If there isn't then why would Canon make the big deal about it?

I also remember reading that both pixel halves contribute to both AF and luminance (=image pixels).

 

[midluk]

I'm pretty sure that this "Dual Pixel raw" thing will be a possibility to use the sensor's distance/sharpness data later in DPP (or if later implemented in Lightroom for example) to do corrections/effects only in unsharp or sharp, close or far away parts of the picture.

If "Dual Pixel raw" is more than markeding speech for "increased bit depth", this will likely be it.
Real distance-dependent haze removal!

 

[3kramd5]

I'm totally confused about this new "dual pixel" feature. Don't know what to believe any more.

I didn't quite understand the technical reason why separated pixel halves would give more DR than combining them (as previously in 7D2, 70D, 80D) in-camera?

It probably wouldn't unless as has been suggested Canon has implemented at the hardware level the ability to drive sensitivity to each sub-pixel individually. I suspect people are grasping at straws given a poorly translated rumor. More likely, it will have on-sensor ADC, which facilitates lower read noise versus 7D2 and 70D.

 

[Ozarker]

Very very Underwhelmed with the specs of 5D4

I was hoping for at least 36mp with No ALF (variable ALF like rxr2) for sharper images, great low light, DR & some new technology derived from the Mirrorless world....something vow like what 5D2 offered when released.

...How is this camera any better than Sony a7r2 / s2 , Nikon 810 ??? which are at their end life cycles & nearing upgrades themselves.

I don't think I can stick with this 5D4 for the next 4 years. Come on be realistic !! Canon philosophy with the 5D line seems to be 'Let's give them just a little so as not to jeopardize their higher end cameras/cine Line'. Canon is still playing the catch up game.Very soon we'll have the Hasselblad X1 medium format mirrorless, the pentax 645Z2, a7r3,.... coming to market. Way Better Image quality & prices are coming down.

I was waiting to upgrade from the 5D2. As a stills photographer & occasional video (70:30 ratio) ...the 5D3 did not offer much so was waiting for the 5D4...and now....this is not significant motivation enough for me to push the $$'s canon's way....I was sitting on the fence with the sony system with the new awesome GMaster pro & batis ,loxia lenses. Now I would be looking at the SONY a7r2 - a7r3 seriously....the awful battery life on the Sony, a general reluctance to switch & huge canon lens collection is what is holding me back tough....but imho still sticking with 5d4 now when there are so many choices would be a dodo approach...I want the best that's available & pl don't say go buy the 5DSR!! it has many issues & is very niche for my needs.

Whats wrong with the a7r2? i have had it for almost a year and since owning it, i have barely used my 5d3 as the a7r2 is superior in IQ, compactness and features.

In terms of battery life, you can get a battery grip and it still a bit lighter then carrying a 5d3.

If the mythical A9 does what its rumoured to do(unlimited buffer raw shots, 70mp version, same build/size as a 5d3) im afraid this 5d4 could be dead by the end of the year.

Already as you say you can grab the holy grail of zooms in 2.8 fashion thats as good as the canon's plus zeiss primes! the lenses are coming rapidly mate on the sony front!

I'll never figure out what you Sony guys mean when you say more compact. On top of that the ergonomics suck.
http://petapixel.com/2016/04/04/sonys-full-frame-pro-mirrorless-fatal-mistake/

 

[3kramd5]

...
Perhaps I misunderstand DPAF, but I thought all pixels were used for both phase detection (i.e. contributing to AF) and luminance (e.g. color once one considers the CFA).

Are you saying there are discrete AF pixels?

If there isn't then why would Canon make the big deal about it?

Because it allows every photosite to contribute both AF and imaging information. If the AF pixels only serve AF, there's nothing special about it.

In which case there's nothing special at all as the sensor (with DPAF) is just performning as well as a sensor without DPAF.

Anyway, read this http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=28326.0 and the patent linked.

From that link:

"...makes it possible to arrange focus detection pixels without generating pixels unavailable as image capture pixels"

In other words, the AF pixels are not AF only, they serve both, which is why it's special. DPAF differs from other OSPDAF in that you don't give up imaging pixels to allow for PDAF pixels.

 

[Buck]

I haven't seen a spec for the battery, current 5d3 battery, new1dx2 battery or a completely new battery?

 

[DrwMDvs]

My body is ready.