We've already seen some
sample footage from Canon's new professional
EOS-1D Mark IV DSLR (and should be seeing plenty more come December), but a pre-production version of the camera has now turned up at the Canon Pro Photo Solutions 09 show in London, and
TrustedReviews managed to get an early hands-on with it. As you might expect, the camera definitely seems to impress in person, with the 1.2 kilogram body providing a feeling of "solid reliability and competence," while its ergonomics also apparently represent a more subtle but welcome improvement over previous Canon offerings. Unfortunately, the folks at
TrustedReviews weren't able to share any sample shots, but they did get a chance to try out the camera's 45-point autofocus system, which is said to be "extremely fast," and its tracking function reportedly had no trouble focusing even in dark, low contrast situations with a 400mm telephoto lens. Hit up the link below for a few more hands-on shots and impressions.
posted Oct 30th 2009 3:58PM
1 things i want but would never afford: This
:(.. I'll stick to my current 1000D + D60
It's an amazing camera, i think i will see how the price changes, given how the price for the 500d fell dramatically and even the 7d has fallen in price already!
Canon should cease all other work until it releases a firmware fix for the 5D's inexcusable lack of 24 & 25 FPS.
I'm trying to figure out if Canon hit their mark or not with this, and although I think that there will be a lot of people (sports photographers and journalists) excited about this, I don't understand why so many people are excited about it's video functions. Other than better build quality, why would anyone buy this over the 5D or 7D for video? Really, what this camera is intended for is high frame rate stills. And, let's take into account the D3s. The D3s shoots 9fps stills with a buffer of 130, the 1D Mk IV shoots 10fps with a buffer of 121. The Nikon D3s may only shoot 720p, but why would this matter if you're spending double the price of a 5D for the same image quality (possibly even less) plus a 1.3X crop. Hands down, the D3s would be a better camera for sports photography and journalism, and it's the same price as the 1D Mk IV. So, unless you have a setup of Canon lenses/accessories, I would go with the D3s, even for video. Am I missing something here?
Yeah you're missing the reasoning behind why the D3s is a better sports camera.
Video eventhough you see nothing important in it... Are you a PJ or a SS? For the last few years already there have been talk by the publications and the agencies to get there photogs to start learning video. It's a logical progression considering everything going on on the web. and BTW the low light video of the 1d IV is amazing and better than the 5d2. Talks of the jello (which nikon is known even more fore) being an afterthought on the 1d IV have been posted on the web already. Why would you go for the D3s for video?? I have no idea here. Lower Res, More jello, Old Motion JPG codec...? Inquiring minds want to know.
More MP. Canon even specifically stated that when asking agencies and publications what they needed in a camera. More MP! was a choice they chose. I don't know where everyone ended up deciding NIkon's 12 mp was the end all. If Nikon didn't rely on other people to make their Sensors then they probably would have had a higher mp camera too. Any photographer CAN use the extra MP to their advantage. If you never shot more than 12 mp, rent a higher mp body for a few weeks and see what i'm talking about.
The canon 1d IV while lower buffer.... can handle even faster memory cards. While we have to wait in see from final reviews how this affects real world usage... If you can clear that buffer quicker it doesn't matter if your buffer is slightly lower.
And finally it comes down to crop vs no crop sensor.
1) Again why does everyone think FF is the holy grail? for people that take landscape / architecture Yes I see a definite need there for ultrawides. But how many people talk about that even though they never owned a 1.3x crop camera... How many nikon people talk about it even though they never owned the amazing 14-24 wide angle nikon. Of course there are times when PJ's and SS's might need it but...Then also need the reach.. As a SS it's the difference between carrying a 200 vs 300 mm or 300 vs 400 mm or Having a 500mm 2.8 + at all!. If you have ever tried carrying any of those bigger lenses around that extra weight is ridiculous! So in this part you need to chose whether you need this level of camera for wide angles or longer reach. No wrong choices here.
2) The IQ debate. Ok we all including me think 102k is frickin an amazing thing. But after going over my work I'm very much puzzled by when I would actually use 102k iso. Not only is it practically unusable noise even at the better 102k nikon d3s but situation wise a lot of people would be hard pressed to find a situation for it that they actually NEED to use 102k. Say at 25600 - 51200 Both cameras compare very favorably. Then for my current work. the D3s (eventhough it DOES seem to have better noise at 102k mind you at 12 mp) doesn't benefit me more than the 1d IV
People need to stop basing IQ just on sensor size. It's like all of you think it's impossible to advance in technology! Even if the size doesn't change there are a ton of other things that can advance in the sensor to make it better. Case in point. Sony A900 vs Nikon D3x.. guess what guys. Same sensor both made by Sony (exact same size of course). But who would argue with me that the A900 has similar noise performance as the D3x. D3 -> D3s... D3s is supposed to have an "optimized version" of the D3 sensor.. again better noise handling...
So just because Canon put how many whatever megapixels in the same sensor as the 1d mark III doesn't mean it's worse! It seems everyone wants to immediately jump on that conclusion as soon as they do a simple division and see the it's small in pixel size.
So conclusion.
Both Cameras.. The D3s and the 1d IV (surprised I said both? shouldnt' be.. I love the way Nikon builds their cameras too and as of now I know the AF in Nikon is amazing and have not tried the 1dIV new af out myself yet.) Would pretty much cover EVERYTHING you would need as a professional photographer.
I honestly can't think of too much more photographic stuff that the two companies could improve for the next gen. If you want to super measurebate the pictures of either camera at 100% size and print wall banners then atleast wait till the final cams come out.
@Ming Han Chung
I won't say I tried to read your entire post. But I -tried- to try to read your entire post.
It's true though, I think people are forced to compare fringe features (like 102k ISO) because the cameras are so comparable in real use.
what you say?
release all zig!
Nikon's sensor is built by Sony?
Then what parameters cause the sony to have that much higher noise? Besides I guess in low light conditions the results on sony are not very good (or perhaps this is due to the metering of the camera?).
BTW I use Sony DSLR (because I can afford it and also because it's anti-shake is in-body I can easily find cheaper lenses for it). After I explore all its capabilities I might stay with higher end sony DSLRs or move to Canon or Nikon.
excellent
Take that Sony, Canon will always remain the champion when it comes to professional digital photography, with their award winning "L" lenses (which stands for "Luxury"). Pros and consumers worldwide trust Canon, which is why they are the #1 manufacturer of pro photo equipment. My uncle who is a pro wedding and sports photographer loves his 5D Mark II, and he said it is the best camera money can buy.
Why must you spew this bullshit every time there is a DSLR article?
Seriously, you're almost as bad as Tim Stevens...
actually L stands for Lipstick... you must not have noticed the red ring.
Dear Santa.....
Dear Brian,
economy sucks ass!
Yours truly,
Santa
Every DSLR article you come along and post the advert for canon, why?
woops, that was directed at iKurt XII
Because he's a cock?
but will it be enough of a step to go from my mk3?
hummm......
I own a 5D Mark II already, but this is going to be my second camera. The 1D Mark IV seems very promising! Very exciting times.
@Reznov
I wonder how well those sites keep up with new phones, video game consoles, operating systems, robots, ...
Why would anyone want this thing for video? Because there's NOTHING like it on the market any where near its price point in the "Real" video camera world. That is what the still community needs to understand before they start bitching about its video functions. A director of photography doesn't need to spend as much time setting up lights for night scenes, and the fact that less lights are needed is a huge savings in cost. If they start making video cameras with this capability, then y'all can have your DLSR camera back. Until then, us video guys are going to be buying your cameras for a while at least... This particular camera has a full 2-stop lower light ability over the 5D because of the ISO processing... that's why you'd buy one of these for video. Oh... It's weatherized. Find me a video camera that's this weatherized... If Nikon had put 1080p video in their D3s, then we'd be eying that one as well... We don't care about brand names.
FAO: Information Central
Canon have publicly announced that they will be releasing the firmware update (early 2010) for the 5D Mark II, which will give it the ability to record using 24/25FPS.
I can't wait for the update as I bought a 5D Mark II only a few months ago. It's my first ever DSLR and I'm loving it so far...not literally! That would just make the stabilisation work it self to death, LOL!!! ;o)
I was all set to purchase a Canon 5d Mark II but not after reading about some focusing issues I am not sure. I really want to have a full censor and it seems that the Mark IV is cropped versus the 5d. Is there any way that Canon could add some Firmware to affect any focusing issues? Please add any comment regarding "Canon 5d Mark II versus Canon 1d Mark IV." that might shed more light on the focusing and censor size. Thanks!