"Two New FF Bodies in 2014" - if 5DM4, would you jump in?

[Dylan777]

I guess the main issues with 5D3 (for me) are the poor DR and the unreliable focusing.

WTF?

Indeed. The "take 3 photos to get one in focus" is really annoying, but it also deals with the lenses used. I think that the body confirms focus with a beep way too easily. There also seem to be great manufacturing tolerances. On my 5D3, the points on the right don't focus as nicely as the points on the left.

Operator error maybe :

I have been shooting with 85L II @ f1.2 to f1.6 outdoor with outer points on 5D III, no problem so far.

 

[tcmatthews]

They would have to hit it out of the park or at least make it interesting.

• Built-in WiFi/GPS
• Built-in RF Flash controller
• Higher MP and better image quality
• Finally get rid of the Compact Flash card and replace it with something faster. (CFast?)
• Fast SD card reader
• USB 3
• Faster processor and the dual pixel auto focus for live view.
• built in focus peeking
• 4 k video

First I do not own a 5D Mark III. If I was a working photographer I would have bought one. There are really only three things that has keep me from buying one.
[list type=decimal]
[*]Price
[*]Compact Flash Card /slow SD card writer
[*]Image Quality
[/list]

I have always felt the Mark III was $500-$1000 more expensive than it should be for its still image quality. I am also not a fan of buying technology that is out of date and it is about time they retire Compact Flash Cards for one of the new standards. It will be painful because none of the new standards are compatible. I do not have a collection of devices that can use Compact Flash so spending all that money for cards that will only be used for one camera was not really that appealing for me.

 

[RLPhoto]

I guess the main issues with 5D3 (for me) are the poor DR and the unreliable focusing.

WTF?

Agreed. WTF. Your doing it wrong.

 

[docsmith]

Amazing camera. I'll be pleasantly surprised if the rumored late 2014 announcement and early 2015 release is true. That would be earlier than expected, but would make sense if they are planning on rolling out new sensor tech. Then I'd expecte the rumored two FF DSLRs to be replacements for the 5DIII and 1DX and, of course, the rumored 7DII all with the new sensor tech.

We will see. I am certainly in no rush. The 5DIII is a great camera. Things that would make me tempted for a 5DIV:

• bump to ~28 MP
• Better High ISO performance (color, DR and noise)
• Better DR--say 14-15 stops
• Better color rendition
• up to 8 fps

But I can see myself shooting the 5DIII for years to come. If the 5DIV is a modest upgrade, I'll likely sit on the sidelines.

 

[mlc_dave]

I came from the Nikon side with a D300. I wanted to go FF but I didn't want/need 30+ MP so I jumped on a 2012 Holiday bundle on the 5DMIII + 24-105. I love this thing.

Now while I enjoy my 5DMIII and it's increased resolution there are things that were worse than my old D300. That said I can agree that with a 5DMIV I'd love to see:


1. DR - I could bump my shadows up +1-1.5 in LR and still retain detail. With my 5DMIII I generally try not to bump up shadows because it immediately causes banding/visual garbage which I have to later filter out.

2. As others have mentioned I miss illuminated AF points in dark settings. Please make this happen Canon.

3. Able to program DOF button to not just AI Servo but AI + Zone AF. This would save steps switching from stationary targets to things like precessions at weddings. (Maybe you can do this, I haven't found out how?

 

[Loswr]

Or people like me that care about DR and IQ just haven't bought a 5D3 because it doesn't add any value over the 5D2 ...

People like you...who are in the minority. :

And you know this because...?

Because Nikon/Sony sensors have had better low ISO DR than Canon sensors for several years/camera generations now, and Canon continued to outsell Nikon during those years...and is still doing so today. Clearly, the majority of consumers are making buying decisions where low ISO DR isn't the priority.

 

[bitm2007]

what would it take to make you grab one immediately?

A competitively priced full frame DSLR that's truly aimed at landscape photographers would be great

35+ MP
Electronic Viewfinder
ISO 50-25600
Better DR than 5D3

To keep costs down

No Video
Basic AF/MF
3 FPS

 

[Dick]

I guess the main issues with 5D3 (for me) are the poor DR and the unreliable focusing.

How much dynamic range do you need and at what ISO do you need it?

DR drops off as ISO is increased and Canon's approach has been to offer good high-ISO bodies. If you shoot primarily in a studio environment (where you can control the light and always shoot in low ISO) then it makes sense to use a camera that has better DR, but in general photography and real-world scenarios you often have to shoot in less than ideal light.

I don't really need better high ISO performance. Lifting shadows could work better for low ISO shots. The D800 works nicely with bright backgrounds, whereas with 5D3 you choose to get the background or the subjects in front of it.

 

[Marsu42]

I don't really need better high ISO performance. Lifting shadows could work better for low ISO shots. The D800 works nicely with bright backgrounds, whereas with 5D3 you choose to get the background or the subjects in front of it.

... or use Magic Lantern's dual_iso module to lift the dr of iso 100 to 14ev+ which solves exactly the situation you described.

 

[Gino]

I don't really need better high ISO performance. Lifting shadows could work better for low ISO shots. The D800 works nicely with bright backgrounds, whereas with 5D3 you choose to get the background or the subjects in front of it.

... or use Magic Lantern's dual_iso module to lift the dr of iso 100 to 14ev+ which solves exactly the situation you described.

Don't you risk damaging the sensor using Magic Lanter's dual_iso module? Here is the warning that is stated:

Warning
This code changes low-level sensor parameters. In the technical doc you can see how this method messes with the feedback loop for optical black, for example. Therefore, it's safe to assume it can fry the sensor or do other nasty things. My 5D3 is still alive after roughly one week of playing with this, but that's not a guarantee.

We don't pay for repairs. Use it at your own risk.

With the large R&D budget that Canon has, I see no reason why Canon can't just produce a better sensor that produces 14+ EV of DR, so we get the best of both worlds; high ISO performance for lowlight conditions, like wedding photography, and higher DR at lower ISO for landscape photography.

And yes, I'm willing to pay a premium if Canon can deliver a 5D MkIV with a sensor that can deliver strong high ISO performance with a much improved DR at lower ISO...cost is only an issue in the absence of value!

 

[pdirestajr]

I think owners of the 5DIII that would consider "upgrading" to an imaginary 5D4 are probably people with really deep pockets and lots of disposable income- so more power to you! As a professional artist I try to keep gear expenses to necessity. I can't see how dropping another 3k+ (If I owned a 5D3) would be a wise move.

And since Canon has released 3 relatively new FF bodies in recent years (1DX, 5D3 and 6D), I really can't see how it would make much sense for them to release any new bodies with incremental upgrades.

Who would they be targeting with this new camera? I can only see a need for a high mega pixel camera in Canon's lineup.

 

[Loswr]

Or people like me that care about DR and IQ just haven't bought a 5D3 because it doesn't add any value over the 5D2 ...

People like you...who are in the minority. :

And you know this because...?

Because Nikon/Sony sensors have had better low ISO DR than Canon sensors for several years/camera generations now, and Canon continued to outsell Nikon during those years...and is still doing so today. Clearly, the majority of consumers are making buying decisions where low ISO DR isn't the priority.

For a scientist, you either have very poor English comprehension skills or you just like to troll because you and I both know that your paragraph above has nothing to do with what I said to which you said I was in the minority.

In fact, you either have very poor metacognition or you just like to insult people (or perhaps both).

My statement has quite a bit to do with yours, considering your entire statement and not just the first clause. I'd say a large majority of dSLR users care about IQ. I'd also say that a majority of dSLR users care about DR (at least, a majority of those who know what DR is...but frankly, that's probably a minority of dSLR users).

But...you state that since the 5DIII does not improve on the (low ISO) IQ or (low ISO) DR of the 5DII (which are already very good, just not the best available), it adds no value. Since the 5DIII improves upon the 5DII in nearly every other way (AF, fps, build, card slots, etc.), that indicates that the only aspect of camera performance you care about is low ISO IQ/DR, and that puts you squarely in the minority.

 

[Gino]

I think owners of the 5DIII that would consider "upgrading" to an imaginary 5D4 are probably people with really deep pockets and lots of disposable income- so more power to you! As a professional artist I try to keep gear expenses to necessity. I can't see how dropping another 3k+ (If I owned a 5D3) would be a wise move.

And since Canon has released 3 relatively new FF bodies in recent years (1DX, 5D3 and 6D), I really can't see how it would make much sense for them to release any new bodies with incremental upgrades.

Who would they be targeting with this new camera? I can only see a need for a high mega pixel camera in Canon's lineup.

Wouldn't you agree, people with deep pockets, and a lot of disposable income, are usually a very good demographic to market to???...I'm just saying! Besides, if photographers, like yourself, are happy with their current gear, you're not going to upgrade regardless of the specs of a 5D MkIV anyway.

Canon needs to sell camera bodies every year, so they're probably going to market to those who want the "latest and greatest" technology, and are willing to pay for it. I'm one of those consumers.

 

[Marsu42]

I don't really need better high ISO performance. Lifting shadows could work better for low ISO shots. The D800 works nicely with bright backgrounds, whereas with 5D3 you choose to get the background or the subjects in front of it.

... or use Magic Lantern's dual_iso module to lift the dr of iso 100 to 14ev+ which solves exactly the situation you described.

Don't you risk damaging the sensor using Magic Lanter's dual_iso module? Here is the warning that is stated:

Yeah, Alex (the main ml dev) is very conservative which is a good thing ...

... but he is personally on 5d3, is currently on vacation and has taken thousands of dual_iso shots w/o any problem. A large crowd of people are using it w/o problems for months, that includes me on 6D and 60D also with thousands of dual_iso shots. I'd wager to say this warning is outdated, it's from nearly half a year ago.

Not that I'm trying to forcibly convince anyone, but I wouldn't want to live w/o it anymore, its so immensely valuable for noon or sunrise/sunset shots with movement in the scene or pulling down highlights with clean shadows. The main reason Alex doesn't mark this module as mainstream stable would be that he's still fine-tuning cr2hdr, the postprocessing software that converts the dual_iso raw file to a "standard" raw with 14ev+ dr.

 

[MLfan3]

hope the 5D4 gets 4 k video and native raw video mode , if it gets that , I will get it.

 

[MLfan3]

one more thing, I would also like to get a mini 1DC, a 6D sized body with 1DC like sensor + 4k video.
something like Canon version of the Df but with quality video.

 

[that1guyy]

hope the 5D4 gets 4 k video and native raw video mode , if it gets that , I will get it.

Canon already said they don't believe RAW video should be on lower end cameras (relative to their Cinema range) so no Canon endorsed RAW video for you, especially not 4K.

 

[RVB]

DR needs to improve and they need to get rid of banding and pattern noise,the D800 sensor is far better than any of Canon's sensor's,Canon really need to catch up with or surpass the D800 sensor.

 

[unfocused]

Or people like me that care about DR and IQ just haven't bought a 5D3 because it doesn't add any value over the 5D2 ...

People like you...who are in the minority. :

And you know this because...?

Because Nikon/Sony sensors have had better low ISO...the majority of consumers are making buying decisions where low ISO DR isn't the priority.

For a scientist...

In fact, you either have very poor metacognition...puts you squarely in the minority.

Here's the tough to accept fact Dilbert. Canon doesn't really care to have you as a customer.

Not being mean. Just explaining the way things work.

It's all about conversion costs. Would Canon like for you to buy a 5DIII. Well, in an ideal world yes. But they have to look at what it will take to do that. You take way too long to make a decision, you don't spend very much and after the sale you are likely to be a high maintenance customer.

So, it's basic business sense that it's better to concentrate on customers who want to make a purchase, are going to make that purchase in the near future, are likely to make additional after-sales purchases and are likely to be content with their purchase decisions.

You want to get the most for your money. So does Canon. They look at you (actually the profile of hundreds of customers like you) and compare what it will cost them to convert you to a buyer. They compare the cost to convert you to a buyer to the cost of other buyers, including existing customers, and focus on doing what it takes to attract interested customers rather than theoretical customers.

 

[dtaylor]

1. DR - I could bump my shadows up +1-1.5 in LR and still retain detail. With my 5DMIII I generally try not to bump up shadows because it immediately causes banding/visual garbage which I have to later filter out.

I routinely bump crop files by this much without difficulty. To say nothing of what I can do with a 5D3 file.

Nikon fans typically "test" the two by turning all NR off on the Canon side (but not always on the Nikon side). You do realize that this is not how you actually process a RAW file with pushed shadows, right?