Some EOS 5D Mark IV Information [CR1]

[LetTheRightLensIn]

7D Mark II does not have a variable crop sensor. 1.6X is limited comparatively. First gen 1DX does not have a variable crop sensor either. The SD Mark IV could answer both of those issues. And it was reported on here that it would come with a 10 FPS drive.When you're on a limited budget, these are very real concerns.

What exactly do you expect "variable crop" to do? It auto-crops pixels away for you. It "changes your view" as much as you can in post. It will not put more pixels on a smaller target. I really don't understand the appeal.

The appeal is that if the 5Ds, say, had a real variable crop mode in RAW it might have been able to hit say 6-7fps in crop mode and had a nice, large buffer for action, and you don't waste a ton of card and disk space when shooting stuff like distant birds or whatnot. Look at how much of a more fully rounded camera it makes the D810. Imagine the D820 with the video and sensor of the A7R II and RAW crop mode.

 

[ahsanford]

Yeah but then they run the danger of people just keeping their 5D3 for stuff that needs it and adding Sony for everthing else and just ignore all this new Canon stuff (or maybe even going whole hog to Nikon).

I agree a lot of folks may hang on to their 5D3s, but if the 5D4 comes in with...

• The 1DX II AF system (not an impossible ask if the 5D4 indeed comes out after)
• 4k video (I personally don't care about this, but it's a massive want by videographers)
• 1 more stop high ISO performance
• 8 fps
• -3 EV AF functionality (all but a certainty, right?)

...it will sell just fine.

But other than on the sensor side (resolution and sensor scores that everyone talks about), where is Canon being clearly out-featured or out-performed in the 5D3-level segment?

Do Nikon or Sony offer more FPS in their segment-similar offerings? The a7 rigs sit around 5 fps and the D750 (6.5) and the D810 (5) are basically right where the 5D3 is.

Does Sony or Nikon have the same number of AF points / history of excellent tracking / etc.? I believe Sony's going bonkers with AF points & viewfinder coverage, but their history of AF tracking/tuning/reliability is not great. And Nikon's offerings are sub-par on the spec sheet (fewer points) and perhaps equivalent functionally. In other words, I've not heard a soul leave the 5D3 fold for AF reasons.

I don't want to sound brand-defensive here, I'm actually curious. I've just never heard anyone feel the 5D3 lets them down other than landscapers griping about low ISO DR and studio folks griping about pixels.

- A

 

[applecider]

Interesting thread in that each of us has a favorite issue that we want out of a 5d4 . The videographers want four k, the sporters want ten frames per sec, wild lifers and drinkers want better high ISO, and the photojournalist wants a 1 dx for cheap ( they can be had new for four k now... The price we all expect the five d four to cost.). Rather than make everyone happy I suspect that many will be just a little unhappy. I want more than 24 MP after waiting for four years and based on the competitions ability to produce better high ISO for wildlife and better noise with high MP sensors.

So for me I'd like to see first better high ISO and lower noise, 28-32 MP so some cropping can be done in post to the point where cropped 100 percent images hold up. 6-7 fps and wifi and gps in camera with intervalometer, and radio master.

I have to say I don't get the demand for in camera crop, just get a fast ssd put your card shots onto it and edit like white water in a waterfall. On the other hand I tink there's a menu where you can set exposure comp for manual.

 

[PureClassA]

I'll say this much, if they manage to drop that C300 II sensor tech in a 5D4 less than a year from the 5DS release, it's gonna be a little bit of a bitter pill. I hope they do, it would be great. Certainly the 1DX must have it.

 

[rs]

All good and well...but please (and I am repeating myself : ) give us EC in Manual Mode when using auto ISO. Preferable with firmware update in 5D MK3

The 7D2 and 5Ds/5DsR got that feature, so the 5D4 is very likely to get it.

Correct me if I am really really wrong.. I find that a lot of people don't understand this feature.

In Manual mode for 6D (also 5Diii), you can not set exposure compensation - that is, when set to Auto ISO - the camera will register ISO to produce standard exposure, meaning, metering = 0.

The desired feature is the ability to set EC to +1 for instance, so that while in Auto ISO, ISO is set such that metering is +1, which is not available on 6D (also 5Diii)

Just sharing.

Yep, that's exactly what it does. Manual mode so you control the shutter speed for the desired exposure time and aperture for the desired DoF, and auto ISO so the camera meters this for you. My 5D2 won't even do that. What this adds over the 5D3/6D is EC in this mode so you can tweak the exposure, much like you already can in Av/Tv modes.

 

[ahsanford]

My general beef is that Canon's FF strategy seems awfully convoluted and specialized. Right now, it stands at:

• 6D --> base model. Solid FF sensor but very little else. Any major creature comforts (proper AF system, 100% VF coverage, 1/8000 shutter, etc.) is not offered with this rig.
  
  
• 5D3 --> Sliding down from 'best non-gripped' model down to 'average non-gripped' model, it's still an excellent all-around pro rig, lacking only a top class sensor and having almost everything else. Best in class at nothing, but very, very good at everything.
  
  
• 5DS/5DSR --> I know it will be sold alongside the 5D3, but those pixels cost extra. It originally appeared to be a specialist studio/landscape rig, but the high ISO performance was not nearly as bad as we thought it would be, so this rig could loosely be considered a high MP variant of the 5D3, which means it's not a specialist camera by any means. This may turn out to be more popular than we first though it might be.
  
  
• 5D4 --> Seems like it will be a 5D3 with more fps, hopefully the 1DX II's AF system and hopefully a better new sensor. Video heavy, but still a great all-rounder.
  
  
• 
  1DX, 1DX II --> Will it become sports/wildlife exclusive now? The old 1Ds studio/landscape camp may bail on the 1-series if the 5DS is their only high MP rig available.
  

All in all, it's a messy story/narrative feature set. Many photographers are stuck straddling two product lines for odd Canon-devised reasons: Consider:

• Studio 1DX users have to choose between the 1-series body type OR a high MP body.
• 5D3 users are torn between chasing the pixels of the 5DS rigs (at the same sensor performance they have now) or waiting for what's behind door #2 with the 5D4.
• And 6D users are going to have a whale of choice of paying probably too much at first for a slightly upmarket 6D2 vs. getting a full-featured but aging sensored 5D3 for about the same price (in a year or so).

I often think they should simplify their FF lines into good / better / best and split the 1D line back into a sports variant and a studio/landscape variant. It seems a cleaner story with such a setup.

- A

 

[KanonKaz]

7D Mark II does not have a variable crop sensor. 1.6X is limited comparatively. First gen 1DX does not have a variable crop sensor either. The SD Mark IV could answer both of those issues. And it was reported on here that it would come with a 10 FPS drive.When you're on a limited budget, these are very real concerns.

What exactly do you expect "variable crop" to do? It auto-crops pixels away for you. It "changes your view" as much as you can in post. It will not put more pixels on a smaller target. I really don't understand the appeal.

Really? It makes a 300mm 2.8 at FF, 390mm 2.8 at 1.3 and a 480 2.8 at 1.6. That's a big advantage for any sports/news shooter. And no, I don't want to shoot at 300mm and crop in post. And no, I don't have time on deadline to shoot in Raw. Changing field of view while actually on the field is a big advantage. It eliminates the need for extra glass and carrying around multiple bodies....Esp on tight deadlines and long nights lugging around equipment.

 

[douglaurent]

I just had the chance to test my 5DsR for a week against a loaner Nikon D810A and Pentax 645z (and more cameras). Some of the 5DsR results were so much behind the competition that it can make you cry as a Canon user. Especially noise was more on GH4 levels, a good step behind Nikon and lightyears behind the 645z. The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed (ISO 100, f8, 1/4) so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise. I know medium format is different, but Canon will charge nearly the same for their next 1DX and nearly half for the 5D4 compared to the Pentax 645z. I hope that a huge company like Canon and decade-long world leader in camera technology should get their S___ together finally as we write the year 2015. The next cameras need to have significant improvements, or they will see that they lose lots of sales after they have lost their credibility.

 

[Sporgon]

The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise.

Jeez.....

 

[TheJock]

Canon FF 5DsR looks OK to me stacked up against the MF 645z................which is more than double the price!

 

[Sporgon]

Canon FF 5DsR looks OK to me stacked up against the MF 645z................which is more than double the price!

Imagine what it would have been like if he had exposed even remotely in the right zone.

 

[eninja]

I just had the chance to test my 5DsR for a week against a loaner Nikon D810A and Pentax 645z (and more cameras). Some of the 5DsR results were so much behind the competition that it can make you cry as a Canon user. Especially noise was more on GH4 levels, a good step behind Nikon and lightyears behind the 645z. The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed (ISO 100, f8, 1/4) so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise. I know medium format is different, but Canon will charge nearly the same for their next 1DX and nearly half for the 5D4 compared to the Pentax 645z. I hope that a huge company like Canon and decade-long world leader in camera technology should get their S___ together finally as we write the year 2015. The next cameras need to have significant improvements, or they will see that they lose lots of sales after they have lost their credibility.

Hi, I want to take this opportunity to ask. Why would you underexpose the shot? Is this the normal way to take nice photos? How is the comparison when both was taken with good exposure. I am not trying to troll, I am just trying to see, how you guys see it. I am a beginner on this.

 

[David]

I just had the chance to test my 5DsR for a week against a loaner Nikon D810A and Pentax 645z (and more cameras). Some of the 5DsR results were so much behind the competition that it can make you cry as a Canon user. Especially noise was more on GH4 levels, a good step behind Nikon and lightyears behind the 645z. The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed (ISO 100, f8, 1/4) so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise. I know medium format is different, but Canon will charge nearly the same for their next 1DX and nearly half for the 5D4 compared to the Pentax 645z. I hope that a huge company like Canon and decade-long world leader in camera technology should get their S___ together finally as we write the year 2015. The next cameras need to have significant improvements, or they will see that they lose lots of sales after they have lost their credibility.

Hi, I want to take this opportunity to ask. Why would you underexpose the shot? Is this the normal way to take nice photos? How is the comparison when both was taken with good exposure. I am not trying to troll, I am just trying to see, how you guys see it. I am a beginner on this.

I just had the chance to test my 5DsR for a week against a loaner Nikon D810A and Pentax 645z (and more cameras). Some of the 5DsR results were so much behind the competition that it can make you cry as a Canon user. Especially noise was more on GH4 levels, a good step behind Nikon and lightyears behind the 645z. The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed (ISO 100, f8, 1/4) so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise. I know medium format is different, but Canon will charge nearly the same for their next 1DX and nearly half for the 5D4 compared to the Pentax 645z. I hope that a huge company like Canon and decade-long world leader in camera technology should get their S___ together finally as we write the year 2015. The next cameras need to have significant improvements, or they will see that they lose lots of sales after they have lost their credibility.

Hi, I want to take this opportunity to ask. Why would you underexpose the shot? Is this the normal way to take nice photos? How is the comparison when both was taken with good exposure. I am not trying to troll, I am just trying to see, how you guys see it. I am a beginner on this.


Pros need flexible files due to changing customers wishes. A Pro explained to me, that making fotos for a hobby, he would use a simple APS-C camera and expose properly, no problems to get the results he wants. But with customers demanding changes after taking a picture and immediately showing a result demands highest possible flexibility in post processing. Eg. wedding, bride wearing bright green must be turned into blue for an ad. If the customer knew what he wants in advance the job would be much easier.... ;D

 

[douglaurent]

Canon FF 5DsR looks OK to me stacked up against the MF 645z................which is more than double the price!

Imagine what it would have been like if he had exposed even remotely in the right zone.

Lots of shots who are exposed right have clipped highlights or shadow zones that need to be brought back in Raw, otherwise nobody would do multi exposure shots or stack images for best results. It seems the people at Ricoh have found a way to give a 645z much more dynamic range on both ends than any Canon camera, with far less noise in it. The good question is: does Canon hold back the many qualities and features other manufacturers have because of marketing and sales strategies, or do they simply can't do it better? Then they should headhunt the right people from other companies, like it seems Sigma has done it 2-4 years ago to improve their products.

 

[StudentOfLight]

I think of the 7D-II as an example of Canon exceeding my expectations. I expected it to offer 20MP at 8fps with 51pt AF system. It turned out to feautre 20MP at 10fps with 65pt AF system. I was hopeful for improved DR and 4K in the 7D-II but it didn't come. As camera meant for shooting action (e.g. sports and wildlife) I think the 7D-II functions pretty well.

What is a 5D Mark-IV meant for? Is the 5D-IV only meant to cater to the needs of current 5D-III users, or must it also cater to the needs of that handful of photographers who bought a 1D-C?

 

[scyrene]

Canon FF 5DsR looks OK to me stacked up against the MF 645z................which is more than double the price!

Imagine what it would have been like if he had exposed even remotely in the right zone.

Lots of shots who are exposed right have clipped highlights or shadow zones that need to be brought back in Raw, otherwise nobody would do multi exposure shots or stack images for best results. It seems the people at Ricoh have found a way to give a 645z much more dynamic range on both ends than any Canon camera, with far less noise in it. The good question is: does Canon hold back the many qualities and features other manufacturers have because of marketing and sales strategies, or do they simply can't do it better? Then they should headhunt the right people from other companies, like it seems Sigma has done it 2-4 years ago to improve their products.

If you're going to make these comparisons, choosing two different sensor sizes is not a reasonable way to go. By all means compare the A7RII or D810 to the 5Ds(r), but not the 645z. Although this is all old news. We KNOW if you underexpose, Sony sensor shots can be brightened with better results than Canon sensor shots. It's been discussed in almost every thread on this site

 

[jeffa4444]

If the 5D IV comes out with a 24-28mp sensor with 14-15 stops DR it will be just on those parameters alone a happy balance between resolution and dynamic range because you cannot have everything and do everything well in one package. Low light cameras need larger pixels its not a new science, and resolution needs small pixels. The AF points spread more outwards across the frame is definately a feature they should add. Over and above that the present 5D III does most things really well and if they do pull off better DR then 4K is bound to follow but knowing Canon it will still be H.264 not H.265 but I could be wrong. They should also move the camera to CFast with a secondary SD slot.

 

[jeffa4444]

My general beef is that Canon's FF strategy seems awfully convoluted and specialized. Right now, it stands at:

• 6D --> base model. Solid FF sensor but very little else. Any major creature comforts (proper AF system, 100% VF coverage, 1/8000 shutter, etc.) is not offered with this rig.
  
  
• 5D3 --> Sliding down from 'best non-gripped' model down to 'average non-gripped' model, it's still an excellent all-around pro rig, lacking only a top class sensor and having almost everything else. Best in class at nothing, but very, very good at everything.
  
  
• 5DS/5DSR --> I know it will be sold alongside the 5D3, but those pixels cost extra. It originally appeared to be a specialist studio/landscape rig, but the high ISO performance was not nearly as bad as we thought it would be, so this rig could loosely be considered a high MP variant of the 5D3, which means it's not a specialist camera by any means. This may turn out to be more popular than we first though it might be.
  
  
• 5D4 --> Seems like it will be a 5D3 with more fps, hopefully the 1DX II's AF system and hopefully a better new sensor. Video heavy, but still a great all-rounder.
  
  
• 
  1DX, 1DX II --> Will it become sports/wildlife exclusive now? The old 1Ds studio/landscape camp may bail on the 1-series if the 5DS is their only high MP rig available.
  

All in all, it's a messy story/narrative feature set. Many photographers are stuck straddling two product lines for odd Canon-devised reasons: Consider:

• Studio 1DX users have to choose between the 1-series body type OR a high MP body.
• 5D3 users are torn between chasing the pixels of the 5DS rigs (at the same sensor performance they have now) or waiting for what's behind door #2 with the 5D4.
• And 6D users are going to have a whale of choice of paying probably too much at first for a slightly upmarket 6D2 vs. getting a full-featured but aging sensored 5D3 for about the same price (in a year or so).

I often think they should simplify their FF lines into good / better / best and split the 1D line back into a sports variant and a studio/landscape variant. It seems a cleaner story with such a setup.

- A

The current 6D has two features that ARE very useful a. Wi-Fi and b. GPS built-in. I would like to see 100% viewfinder and better DR with better low light noise control and NO banding. The AF system clearly needs improvement but this camera is primarily a "travel" camera not an action camera. Finally I think the range is fine car companies have increased niche models why not camera companies?

 

[Sporgon]

I still maintain we may see an interchangeable prism on the 5DIV if it is to be more video orientated. Private pointed out about a year ago; these kind of innovations have always been seen on the 1 series first, but I think when it comes to video in a dslr the 5 series is the way to go.

Not difficult to do; one interchangeable head - slides into the top of the body like the old F-1 and F2/3 camera, a pentaprism. The second an EVF. Slides in the same, contacts plug in once fully home, mirror automatically locks up, DPAF used for focus off the sensor, and you have your mirrorless EVF 5D without upsetting people like me

In fact Canon, if you don't do this now you'd better get me on the development team quick. My rates are, well, negotiable.

 

[LonelyBoy]

We understand a crop mode is not a teleconverter -- you gain no detail, agree.

But for Nikon, it keeps your file size down and boosts your FPS. That's a nice option, isn't it?

- A

It was first mentioned in this thread by KanonKaz, who said:

"And....The variable crop sensor at Full, 1.3X and 1.6X. Important to have various lengths when shooting sports, and news as well."

Not a word about framerate or file size, but rather "various lengths". Variable crop factor doesn't achieve that.