*UPDATED* Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications & Image

[Mikehit]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

...
It's amazing to me that people still think that pixel density affects total image noise and shake.

http://petapixel.com/2015/10/21/phase-one-xf-feature-update-1-adds-seismographic-vibration-delay-and-more/

Is that because it makes shake apparent where it wan't before, or is it so you can take maximum benefit from all those pixels? The two are quite different.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

Typical Dumbass Canon behaviour, its time to drop CF slot already. Pretty sure Nikon will drop CF from their D810 replacement in favour of XQD.

You obviously don't read CR very much - keeping CF will preserve the "huge" investment many Canon photographers have already made in these cards. That these cards represent an obsolete interface and obsolete technology is beside the point - they still work and people want to keep using them until, well, until they die. While people will be happy to buy newer, faster, CF cards from time to time, buying new CFast cards is just out of the question (even if they're faster.)

Sorry, but this is just complete bullS___. At some point in time you'll have to make the change and I believe we are either very close to this point or past it. What disk slot does you computer feature: 8", 5.25" 3.5"? Ah, tape, sorry nevermind...

That point is when the capacity and/or speed of the recording media becomes a limitation. That was true for the 1D X II for CF, but if it's not the case for the 5DIV, then changing format just for the sake of it becomes a needless additional expense for buyers.

For the 1D X II, it was a needed expense – and Canon helped defray that cost by offering a free card+reader bundle. Doing so for the 5DIV's much larger sales volume would be quite costly. While that doesn't matter to consumers, I can assure you it matters to Canon.

No doubt Canon has data from consumers to support sticking with CF being better for sales, it's also better for most consumers, who likely already have CF cards and readers.

Too bad you can't double the capacity of a CF card by cutting a notch out of the other side and flipping it over.

True short term given you limit the camera specs such that you don't "have to" upgrade to CFast. Yet it remains a short-term trade-off. It will not be possible or reasonable to remaint with an existing technology because the users would have extra investments with a tech change. That will come anyway, and the decision can easily and quickly turn into a handicap.

Sorry, but it seems like you're not getting this – and it's not that complicated. It's very unlikely that Canon limited the camera specs based on keeping CF. The 1D X II needs CFast for full performance, but if you think the 5DIV should match the speed specs of the 1D X II, you should move to dilbertland. Please explain how, if a camera is released today and uses CF, that not using CFast will 'easily and quickly turn into a handicap'. Are Sandisk and Lexar going to stop producing CF cards? Consider that even 8" floppies are still being manufactured, and 3.5" disks are still widely available.

Yes, eventually the performance needs of the 5-series will require CFast (or something newer). But the 5DIV isn't there yet. Meanwhile, a 128 GB Sandisk CF costs $150, and a 128 GB CFast costs $370. A storage medium that costs 2.5x as much without offering any performance benefit for a given camera is a real and present handicap, not some vague and unspecified potential future problem (except, apparently, for certain dumbasses who'd prefer to needlessly waste money).

 

[Mikehit]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

...
It's amazing to me that people still think that pixel density affects total image noise and shake.

http://petapixel.com/2015/10/21/phase-one-xf-feature-update-1-adds-seismographic-vibration-delay-and-more/

Is that because it makes shake apparent where it wan't before, or is it so you can take maximum benefit from all those pixels? The two are quite different.

The goal is the latter and the former is caused by smaller pixels.

http://www.bettertravelphotos.com/blog/item/shutter-speed-vs-focal-length-rule-for-razor-sharp-photos

If you print an image from the 5DSR and the 5DIII at the same size and view from the same distance will there be visibly more shake on the image from the 5DSR by virtue of having more pixels? I don't think so.
Viewed at 100%, yes because the images are different sizes.

 

[Eldar]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

...
It's amazing to me that people still think that pixel density affects total image noise and shake.

http://petapixel.com/2015/10/21/phase-one-xf-feature-update-1-adds-seismographic-vibration-delay-and-more/

Is that because it makes shake apparent where it wan't before, or is it so you can take maximum benefit from all those pixels? The two are quite different.

The goal is the latter and the former is caused by smaller pixels.

http://www.bettertravelphotos.com/blog/item/shutter-speed-vs-focal-length-rule-for-razor-sharp-photos

If you print an image from the 5DSR and the 5DIII at the same size and view from the same distance will there be visibly more shake on the image from the 5DSR by virtue of having more pixels? I don't think so.
Viewed at 100%, yes because the images are different sizes.

To get maximum benefit for the higher resolution, you have to keep your camera more steady. At the same level of vibration, a 5DSR will not be worse than a 5DIII, but you will not (necessarily) benefit from the extra resolution.

 

[Eldar]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

Typical Dumbass Canon behaviour, its time to drop CF slot already. Pretty sure Nikon will drop CF from their D810 replacement in favour of XQD.

You obviously don't read CR very much - keeping CF will preserve the "huge" investment many Canon photographers have already made in these cards. That these cards represent an obsolete interface and obsolete technology is beside the point - they still work and people want to keep using them until, well, until they die. While people will be happy to buy newer, faster, CF cards from time to time, buying new CFast cards is just out of the question (even if they're faster.)

Sorry, but this is just complete bullS___. At some point in time you'll have to make the change and I believe we are either very close to this point or past it. What disk slot does you computer feature: 8", 5.25" 3.5"? Ah, tape, sorry nevermind...

That point is when the capacity and/or speed of the recording media becomes a limitation. That was true for the 1D X II for CF, but if it's not the case for the 5DIV, then changing format just for the sake of it becomes a needless additional expense for buyers.

For the 1D X II, it was a needed expense – and Canon helped defray that cost by offering a free card+reader bundle. Doing so for the 5DIV's much larger sales volume would be quite costly. While that doesn't matter to consumers, I can assure you it matters to Canon.

No doubt Canon has data from consumers to support sticking with CF being better for sales, it's also better for most consumers, who likely already have CF cards and readers.

Too bad you can't double the capacity of a CF card by cutting a notch out of the other side and flipping it over.

True short term given you limit the camera specs such that you don't "have to" upgrade to CFast. Yet it remains a short-term trade-off. It will not be possible or reasonable to remaint with an existing technology because the users would have extra investments with a tech change. That will come anyway, and the decision can easily and quickly turn into a handicap.

Sorry, but it seems like you're not getting this – and it's not that complicated. It's very unlikely that Canon limited the camera specs based on keeping CF. The 1D X II needs CFast for full performance, but if you think the 5DIV should match the speed specs of the 1D X II, you should move to dilbertland. Please explain how, if a camera is released today and uses CF, that not using CFast will 'easily and quickly turn into a handicap'. Are Sandisk and Lexar going to stop producing CF cards? Consider that even 8" floppies are still being manufactured, and 3.5" disks are still widely available.

Yes, eventually the performance needs of the 5-series will require CFast (or something newer). But the 5DIV isn't there yet. Meanwhile, a 128 GB Sandisk CF costs $150, and a 128 GB CFast costs $370. A storage medium that costs 2.5x as much without offering any performance benefit for a given camera is a real and present handicap, not some vague and unspecified potential future problem (except, apparently, for certain dumbasses who'd prefer to needlessly waste money).

2x64GB 1066x Lexar is currently on offer for $109 at B&H. Canon's decision to keep CF is a clearly positive.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

...
2x64GB 1066x Lexar is currently on offer for $109 at B&H. Canon's decision to keep CF is a clearly positive.

Old technology always goes on sale for "cheap" prices once it becomes clear that the ability to sell it in the future is limited. Lexar, B&H and others can already see the market for CF shrinking so they want to clear out as much of their expensive stock that they've got lots of.

Hey dilbert, do SD cards go on sale "for cheap prices"? Must be old technology. Is the market for those shrinking, too? Your favorite camera, the Pentax K1, uses SD cards. Oh, and it's UHS-I, not -II...and here I thought you said the camera was so advanced. :

 

[George D.]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications & Image

If that's the new EOS 5D Mk.xx logo it's aesthetically unpleasant. All this lettering, the opposite of frugal.

Of course, eliminating the separate Mark xx badge saves a few pennies and minutes in production line but elegance is more important. Change it!

 

[TAF]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications and Image

I also notice immediately the new ridge that surrounds the prism-- this makes sense to me, since this would possibly be a non-magnesium alloy part of the frame, allowing GPS and wi-fi built-in without a GPS bump. This is another small feature that I doubt someone would fake, since the obvious thing would be for a faker to just throw the GPS bump on a 5D body.

Surely the larger "pentaprism" housing was necessary to contain the super fast EVF, and this a mirrorless...

 

[romanr74]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

Typical Dumbass Canon behaviour, its time to drop CF slot already. Pretty sure Nikon will drop CF from their D810 replacement in favour of XQD.

You obviously don't read CR very much - keeping CF will preserve the "huge" investment many Canon photographers have already made in these cards. That these cards represent an obsolete interface and obsolete technology is beside the point - they still work and people want to keep using them until, well, until they die. While people will be happy to buy newer, faster, CF cards from time to time, buying new CFast cards is just out of the question (even if they're faster.)

Sorry, but this is just complete bullS___. At some point in time you'll have to make the change and I believe we are either very close to this point or past it. What disk slot does you computer feature: 8", 5.25" 3.5"? Ah, tape, sorry nevermind...

That point is when the capacity and/or speed of the recording media becomes a limitation. That was true for the 1D X II for CF, but if it's not the case for the 5DIV, then changing format just for the sake of it becomes a needless additional expense for buyers.

For the 1D X II, it was a needed expense – and Canon helped defray that cost by offering a free card+reader bundle. Doing so for the 5DIV's much larger sales volume would be quite costly. While that doesn't matter to consumers, I can assure you it matters to Canon.

No doubt Canon has data from consumers to support sticking with CF being better for sales, it's also better for most consumers, who likely already have CF cards and readers.

Too bad you can't double the capacity of a CF card by cutting a notch out of the other side and flipping it over.

True short term given you limit the camera specs such that you don't "have to" upgrade to CFast. Yet it remains a short-term trade-off. It will not be possible or reasonable to remaint with an existing technology because the users would have extra investments with a tech change. That will come anyway, and the decision can easily and quickly turn into a handicap.

Sorry, but it seems like you're not getting this – and it's not that complicated. It's very unlikely that Canon limited the camera specs based on keeping CF. The 1D X II needs CFast for full performance, but if you think the 5DIV should match the speed specs of the 1D X II, you should move to dilbertland. Please explain how, if a camera is released today and uses CF, that not using CFast will 'easily and quickly turn into a handicap'. Are Sandisk and Lexar going to stop producing CF cards? Consider that even 8" floppies are still being manufactured, and 3.5" disks are still widely available.

Yes, eventually the performance needs of the 5-series will require CFast (or something newer). But the 5DIV isn't there yet. Meanwhile, a 128 GB Sandisk CF costs $150, and a 128 GB CFast costs $370. A storage medium that costs 2.5x as much without offering any performance benefit for a given camera is a real and present handicap, not some vague and unspecified potential future problem (except, apparently, for certain dumbasses who'd prefer to needlessly waste money).

Dont fantasize into my comments...

What triggered my comment was a statement essentially suggesting cameras should use CF cards until they die, because users don't want to buy new tech cards. And I stick to my viewpoint that this is a BS statement, because it inevitably leads to a limitation of technical development.

Let me know if you disagree.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

What triggered my comment was a statement essentially suggesting cameras should use CF cards until they die, because users don't want to buy new tech cards. And I stick to my viewpoint that this is a BS statement, because it inevitably leads to a limitation of technical development.

Let me know if you disagree.

Oh, I didn't realize you took a statement by dilbert as a realistic or plausible viewpoint. My bad...or yours.

 

[arthurbikemad]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications & Image

How it all moves on lol

Eventually!!

 

[romanr74]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

What triggered my comment was a statement essentially suggesting cameras should use CF cards until they die, because users don't want to buy new tech cards. And I stick to my viewpoint that this is a BS statement, because it inevitably leads to a limitation of technical development.

Let me know if you disagree.

Oh, I didn't realize you took a statement by dilbert as a realistic or plausible viewpoint. My bad...or yours.

I took it as a viewpoint - I didn't say realistic nor plausible, but BS!

 

[zim]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications & Image

7+ fps and a decent buffer on a 30mp sensor then CF cards, good job Canon

 

[arthurbikemad]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications & Image

Well I'd have been gutted to ditch all my old out of date CF cards and buy a whole bundle of Cfast cards, also I enjoy the SD card slot as its handy just to chuck it in my Mac and transfer the images quick and easy while out and about, tbh I find the combo of CF and SD works very well for me, I hope to CF when shooting action etc and use the SD card for all my other work.. So im my case I am happy, NOT that I will upgrade my 5D3 unless much better noise control and more DR. I wanted a 1DX2 but threw the cash onto a new Mk2 500 as I felt the 1DX2 was not enough of an upgrade from the Mk1, keen to see that spec of the Mk4 when it arrives, that I will lose much sleep over it haha

Mind you this whole debate could be rubbish, it's only over when the fat lady sings.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

What triggered my comment was a statement essentially suggesting cameras should use CF cards until they die, because users don't want to buy new tech cards. And I stick to my viewpoint that this is a BS statement, because it inevitably leads to a limitation of technical development.

Let me know if you disagree.

Oh, I didn't realize you took a statement by dilbert as a realistic or plausible viewpoint. My bad...or yours.

I took it as a viewpoint - I didn't say realistic nor plausible, but BS!

Well then, we certainly agree!

 

[tron]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications & Image

7+ fps and a decent buffer on a 30mp sensor then CF cards, good job Canon

Do we know that for sure? I would love it too...

 

[FEBS]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

Shipping to happen by December. If Customs keeps it at the pier it will come out January.

I had last week info that 5D4 will be deliverable in September 2016. Seems to be the only info that Canon was prepared to give at that moment.

 

[jebrady03]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

...
It's amazing to me that people still think that pixel density affects total image noise and shake.

http://petapixel.com/2015/10/21/phase-one-xf-feature-update-1-adds-seismographic-vibration-delay-and-more/

Is that because it makes shake apparent where it wan't before, or is it so you can take maximum benefit from all those pixels? The two are quite different.

The goal is the latter and the former is caused by smaller pixels.

http://www.bettertravelphotos.com/blog/item/shutter-speed-vs-focal-length-rule-for-razor-sharp-photos

If you print an image from the 5DSR and the 5DIII at the same size and view from the same distance will there be visibly more shake on the image from the 5DSR by virtue of having more pixels? I don't think so.
Viewed at 100%, yes because the images are different sizes.

To get maximum benefit for the higher resolution, you have to keep your camera more steady. At the same level of vibration, a 5DSR will not be worse than a 5DIII, but you will not (necessarily) benefit from the extra resolution.

This post and the one before it are exactly what I was getting at, Sir Dilbert.

 

[rrcphoto]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications

Where is the damm image, I'm I the only person who didn't see it?

Have a look here:
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_5d4.html

-pw

Just looked, still nothing!

Refresh the post on the site and see the link at the bottom

why did you have to take the image down from this post?

 

[Donkey_Kong]

Re: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Specifications & Image

It's almost humorous that there is a website dedicated to "Canon Rumors", yet it doesn't actually have any genuinely useful information relating to a Canon camera being announced in a couple of weeks (granted, this website was able to tell us when the camera will be released).

Tell us about the DR improvements of the 5DIV! Will it have eye control focus or auto AFMA? Hybrid viewfinder? Built in RT? This is the sort of information we need! If you can't get real info on products Canon are soon to release, then why run a website called Canon Rumors? Perhaps, "guesswork and info found from other parts of the web relating to Canon products" would be a more appropriate title.

Also, these people complaining about the (lack of) video features..BUY A VIDEO CAMERA!