Some EOS 5D Mark IV Information [CR1]

[LonelyBoy]

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.

It does no such thing; it auto-crops the edges of the frame. It does not change the focal length of the lens. It does not provide more detail. It does save some file size (might be relevant for bandwidth, but storage is dirt cheap) and framerate (if the rest of the camera can operate at a higher rate and is only limited by internal bandwidth).

What does cropping have to do with shooting RAW? You can crop JPEGs (or BMPs, PNGs...). Unless your framing is always perfect, you or your editor will have to do that anyway.

 

[kevl]

If the 5DIV is 24MP and doesn't absolutely stomp on everything else out there in the dynamic range and high ISO performance areas it will be dead in the water.

Who would buy such a camera? Canon needs to stop protecting their over priced products by crippling their lower products.

If the future of Canon is mediocrity then it becomes worth it to consider switching systems to Nikon or just going to Sony and using Canon glass.

I don't need a $4000 consumer camera... I won't even consider purchasing one.

 

[scyrene]

If the 5DIV is 24MP and doesn't absolutely stomp on everything else out there in the dynamic range and high ISO performance areas it will be dead in the water.

Who would buy such a camera? Canon needs to stop protecting their over priced products by crippling their lower products.

There are plenty of Canon 5DIII owners that will upgrade "just because" ...

I don't expect there are, but if you're right, then they're not dead in the water. Either way I think anyone who feels desperate to upgrade to the latest thing all the time has more money than sense, but I guess that's one of the bases of consumerism.

 

[shutterlag]

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.

The Ricoh folks haven't found a way - the folks at Sony who made the sensor did

 

[gsealy]

I use the 5DIII in a lot of different ways. One of them is shooting video with external recording. Modest increases in MP and/or better ISO performance are nice, but they are not enough to sway me to spend $4K on the 5DIV. But if the 5DIV has 4K video that I can record externally, then that is a different story and I am in the market. I like the value and flexibility that I have with 5DIII. So I want the same thing in the 5DIV.

 

[ahsanford]

If the future of Canon is mediocrity then it becomes worth it to consider switching systems to Nikon or just going to Sony and using Canon glass.

I don't need a $4000 consumer camera... I won't even consider purchasing one.

I won't talk you down from that ledge. Go to Sony and Nikon. Do it. Nothing is stopping you. That added DR will win you a Pulitzer, I'm sure.

But keep in mind, most professionals keep buying 5D3's and racking up awards with them. There's more to a camera body than low-ISO DR and how many pixels you have.

- A

 

[rs]

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.

It turns a 300/2.8 into a 480/2.8? That's quite a magical ability! If only it cropped more, then it could make an 800/2.8 out of the pancake 40/2.8! ???

 

[youngjediboy]

If the future of Canon is mediocrity then it becomes worth it to consider switching systems to Nikon or just going to Sony and using Canon glass.

I don't need a $4000 consumer camera... I won't even consider purchasing one.

I won't talk you down from that ledge. Go to Sony and Nikon. Do it. Nothing is stopping you. That added DR will win you a Pulitzer, I'm sure.

But keep in mind, most professionals keep buying 5D3's and racking up awards with them. There's more to a camera body than low-ISO DR and how many pixels you have.

- A

You don't need to talk anyone down from moving away from Canon. That's Canon's job and so far they've been doing a terrible job. You're totally right, the camera is just a tool and won't automatically make your work better and win you awards. BUT the vast majority of people who spend money on these aren't doing it to win awards, they use them to earn an living, make some extra side money, for family/fun/personal use, etc.

As customers, if a company is no longer making compelling products, we will no longer purchase from them and go to other companies who will make better products. I've enjoyed Canon products for years and I hope I will continue to IF Canon continues to make good products. If Sony, Panasonic and others make better products, I will buy those. It's simple. You don't need to stop us and it's not your job to do so (unless you work in Canon's marketing team in which case get your ass to work!)

 

[Silvertt7]

What I'm looking for most, which will determine whether I keep 5D Mark III or make the upgrade:

-Spot metering at each AF point. Currently lacking behind competition.
-Respectable DR improvement. Currently lacking behind competition.
-More AF points. The Mark III's AF count and spread is not bad, but no doubt it can be improved by including more that fills out the frame.
-Bonus that would be greatly appreciated but not expected: Swivel screen.

 

[ahsanford]

You don't need to talk anyone down from moving away from Canon. That's Canon's job and so far they've been doing a terrible job. You're totally right, the camera is just a tool and won't automatically make your work better and win you awards. BUT the vast majority of people who spend money on these aren't doing it to win awards, they use them to earn an living, make some extra side money, for family/fun/personal use, etc.

As customers, if a company is no longer making compelling products, we will no longer purchase from them and go to other companies who will make better products. I've enjoyed Canon products for years and I hope I will continue to IF Canon continues to make good products. If Sony, Panasonic and others make better products, I will buy those. It's simple. You don't need to stop us and it's not your job to do so (unless you work in Canon's marketing team in which case get your ass to work!)

That's entirely fair, but Canon's being beaten on the sensor front annnnnd... where else? Flash sync speed, perhaps? Every other aspect of my 5D3 remains the best possible option for the dollar for me and my needs -- the build, the AF, the ergonomics, the handling, the lenses, accessories, ecosystem, etc.

Consider my pixel-equivalent alternatives:

I could move to the D750, which despite having a slightly better sensor and +0.5 fps, offers little else. Given that rig is equal parts D610 as it is D810, I don't really consider it an upgrade to my (generally) top-spec'd 5D3.

I could move to the a7 II, which again has a slightly better sensor... and three times as many crippling limitations associated with a move to a mirrorless platform. I'd love that sensor, and I would curse the AF, battery life and responsiveness all day. If I was a dedicated landscaper, I would consider that move. Anything else, I'd stick with my mirror.

Please forgive me, I'm not trying to wind anyone up -- but it seems like we're comically over-prioritizing the sensor over other considerations. I am 100% confident that migrating to another platform will leave me less happy overall and most certainly for the worse financially.

- A

 

[johnhenry]

without a huge pixel number jump, or 4K video, a 5Ds or r would make sense

 

[douglaurent]

Every other aspect of my 5D3 remains the best possible option for the dollar for me and my needs -- the build, the AF, the ergonomics, the handling, the lenses, accessories, ecosystem, etc.

...that's exactly the problem: they lead in all the aspects mentioned here and we love Canon for it, but in all the many other important aspects they are way behind. If Canon doesnt change anything, using a new Canon DSLR will be a stupid thing as you paid premium prices for it, but are not able to work with premium quality and features.

 

[ahsanford]

Every other aspect of my 5D3 remains the best possible option for the dollar for me and my needs -- the build, the AF, the ergonomics, the handling, the lenses, accessories, ecosystem, etc.

...that's exactly the problem: they lead in all the aspects mentioned here and we love Canon for it, but in all the many other important aspects they are way behind. If Canon doesnt change anything, using a new Canon DSLR will be a stupid thing as you paid premium prices for it, but are not able to work with premium quality and features.

I hear you, but please be more clear. What are "all the many other important aspects" are they behind in besides the sensor?

- A

 

[asmundma]

You don't need to talk anyone down from moving away from Canon. That's Canon's job and so far they've been doing a terrible job. You're totally right, the camera is just a tool and won't automatically make your work better and win you awards. BUT the vast majority of people who spend money on these aren't doing it to win awards, they use them to earn an living, make some extra side money, for family/fun/personal use, etc.

As customers, if a company is no longer making compelling products, we will no longer purchase from them and go to other companies who will make better products. I've enjoyed Canon products for years and I hope I will continue to IF Canon continues to make good products. If Sony, Panasonic and others make better products, I will buy those. It's simple. You don't need to stop us and it's not your job to do so (unless you work in Canon's marketing team in which case get your ass to work!)

That's entirely fair, but Canon's being beaten on the sensor front annnnnd... where else? Flash sync speed, perhaps? Every other aspect of my 5D3 remains the best possible option for the dollar for me and my needs -- the build, the AF, the ergonomics, the handling, the lenses, accessories, ecosystem, etc.

Consider my pixel-equivalent alternatives:

I could move to the D750, which despite having a slightly better sensor and +0.5 fps, offers little else. Given that rig is equal parts D610 as it is D810, I don't really consider it an upgrade to my (generally) top-spec'd 5D3.

I could move to the a7 II, which again has a slightly better sensor... and three times as many crippling limitations associated with a move to a mirrorless platform. I'd love that sensor, and I would curse the AF, battery life and responsiveness all day. If I was a dedicated landscaper, I would consider that move. Anything else, I'd stick with my mirror.

Please forgive me, I'm not trying to wind anyone up -- but it seems like we're comically over-prioritizing the sensor over other considerations. I am 100% confident that migrating to another platform will leave me less happy overall and most certainly for the worse financially.

- A

Agree, A7 ii did not offer to much compared to 5D3, except some weight, stabilisation, and little better picture quality .
The A7r ii will do, better autofocus then previous A7(s) (remains to be tested fully), 4k video and high resolution, better ISO, etc. I sincerely doubt 5D4 will be able to compete.
My plan is to keep my 1Dx for sports and wildlife and then slightly moved over to Sony for the rest.... (high resolution - already move over for video).
The question now is - Will Sony be able to deliver A/r ii end of this month??

 

[unfocused]

Every other aspect of my 5D3 remains the best possible option for the dollar for me and my needs -- the build, the AF, the ergonomics, the handling, the lenses, accessories, ecosystem, etc.

...that's exactly the problem: they lead in all the aspects mentioned here and we love Canon for it, but in all the many other important aspects they are way behind. If Canon doesnt change anything, using a new Canon DSLR will be a stupid thing as you paid premium prices for it, but are not able to work with premium quality and features.

Please provide a list of "all the many other important aspects" where Canon is "way behind."

The sensor chart included in another thread, indicates that the new high resolution Canon 5Ds has about 1/3 of a stop less dynamic range at ISO 400 than a competitor with considerably less resolution. That's insignificant, not "way behind."

Please note also that in a recent interview (referenced in another thread) a top Sony executive admitted that their mirrorless cameras are not as good as DSLRs, but getting closer. That sounds to me like the competition believes Canon is ahead, not "way behind."

And, while you are at it, please provide some market research to demonstrate that the aspects you are referencing are indeed "important," because the marketplace doesn't seem to think Canon is "way behind" in areas are that important enough to cause buyers to choose another brand.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

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.

How does it make the lenses 390mm and 480mm? It doesn't in any way that matters for sports since only the FOV changes after the fact (not in the VF, where the extra FOV of FF, for a given photosite density, is a plus, since you get same reach but easier tracking) and not the reach change.

Pretty much every sport image taken has to get cropped one way or another in post anyway.

 

[msm]

Please note also that in a recent interview (referenced in another thread) a top Sony executive admitted that their mirrorless cameras are not as good as DSLRs, but getting closer. That sounds to me like the competition believes Canon is ahead, not "way behind."

If you are talking about the dpreview interview, then he was talking about autofocus performance.

 

[unfocused]

Please note also that in a recent interview (referenced in another thread) a top Sony executive admitted that their mirrorless cameras are not as good as DSLRs, but getting closer. That sounds to me like the competition believes Canon is ahead, not "way behind."

If you are talking about the dpreview interview, then he was talking about autofocus performance.

Yes. I'd rather have a camera that focuses than one that has lots of dynamic range.

 

[douglaurent]

Please provide a list of "all the many other important aspects" where Canon is "way behind."

...if you have a chance to work for a while with a 1DC, 645z, GH4, D810, A7S etc you will see how many things you hate about the limitations of a 5D3, 5Ds or 7D2: dynamic range, noise, no 4k video, missing swivel screen, no internal stabilization, missing focus peaking etc. The 645z for example is not mirrorless and not for video, but still has decent focus peaking, which is a great help for manual lenses and has nothing to do with sensor size etc. The A7RII will give the option to use speedboosters in crop mode, which means you could use a Zeiss Otus that has one stop more light and is stabilized. Canon won't have all these advantages in their 5D4. It's a shame because the Canon lens lineup is the best, and the body handling as well. Workflow and image results are just better with other cameras. Canon most likely could deliver much more, but won't do because obviously still too many users have been too loyal or too uninformed to realize that and didnt vote with their wallets yet. I say this as a user who owns 100+ Canon products including always the latest top gear.

 

[ahsanford]

Please provide a list of "all the many other important aspects" where Canon is "way behind."

...if you have a chance to work for a while with a 1DC, 645z, GH4, D810, A7S etc you will see how many things you hate about the limitations of a 5D3, 5Ds or 7D2: dynamic range, noise, no 4k video, missing swivel screen, no internal stabilization, missing focus peaking etc. The 645z for example is not mirrorless and not for video, but still has decent focus peaking, which is a great help for manual lenses and has nothing to do with sensor size etc. The A7RII will give the option to use speedboosters in crop mode, which means you could use a Zeiss Otus that has one stop more light and is stabilized. Canon won't have all these advantages in their 5D4. It's a shame because the Canon lens lineup is the best, and the body handling as well. Workflow and image results are just better with other cameras. Canon most likely could deliver much more, but won't do because obviously still too many users have been too loyal or too uninformed to realize that and didnt vote with their wallets yet. I say this as a user who owns 100+ Canon products including always the latest top gear.

A list of grievances that aren't all sensor related! Bravo. Now we're talking.

IBIS is nice I suppose, but I don't personally have a cabinet of old non-IS lenses I'd like to shoot with, so I don't personally need it. (I seem to recall on-lens IS is more effective than IBIS, but that's a little out of my wheelhouse -- I'm not sure on that.) But sure, I could see folks putting that to use.

+1 on screen options in general. I've long been a proponent of Canon scooping everyone with a standardized weathersealed mount to let us change out the back LCD for different options: rigid w/o touch would be default, but there would be options for rigid w/touch, tilt only, tilt & swivel, etc. Then for a little extra money and a few added SKUs, Canon could say YES to any user preference on this, and despite the added cost, everyone gets what they want.

My theory on 4K is that it's 100% going to be on-board the 5D4 at launch, but stubborn old Canon might not announce that it's on-board and they'd lock it out with firmware (just at first) to see if they can keep up the Cinema EOS sales. If When that fails epically, Canon swoops in with a firmware update and the 4K will be unlocked -- not as a klugy post-market fix, but as a from-the-ground-up properly designed-in feature.

- A