Canon announces 1D M4

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by david_jenkins|5, Oct 19, 2009.

  1. Unless Canons R&D dept work exceptionally quickly I very much doubt that the 1D MkIV is a response to the D3s.
    Both companies want to be at the top of the game, and in terms of press useage, probably the most demanding market, it is this type of camera (rather than the 1Ds or D@x class) which push the boundaries and are the best available with the technology possible at the time of launch.
    Are the Nikon users who apparantly jumped ship at the launch of the d700 & D3 now going to jump back? Doubt it. There'll be another Nikon out in a short while.
    For most of us we can be grateful that the technology developed for these machines will trickle down.
    For the pros or rich hobbyists, at least wait to there have been some real-life tests published from trusted sources.
     
  2. and it's only $5,000 - I think I'll pick several up on the way home
     
  3. APS-H and only 16MP? What can't they make their "flagship" camera better than all the other ones, or at least incorporate all the same features of all their other cameras?
    The 1D-Mark IV should have the 21MP sensor from the 5D Mark II AND it should be able to shoot 10 FPS. Anything less is just a big *YAWN*
     
  4. "The 1D-Mark IV should have the 21MP sensor from the 5D Mark II AND it should be able to shoot 10 FPS. Anything less is just a big *YAWN*"
    There is nothing wrong with "only" 16mp on a 1D4. I have a 1D3 and even at 10mp the output is fantastic. The full frame sensor is reserved for the 1DS series. Wait until a 1DS4 comes out. I'm sure it will have improved specs across the board like the 1D4. At this point in time we pretty much have all the technology we'll need for everyday shooting. I also have a 1DS3 and it prints as large as I need. If we fast forward 4-5 years when we might have 60mp DSLR cameras and 30mp point and shoots, will we say that the 10-24mp cameras of 2009 were "poor" in their performance? Doubtful.
     
  5. At this point in time we pretty much have all the technology we'll need for everyday shooting.​
    This is exactly my point. What's so exciting about a new camera that doesn't do anything new? Does anybody care about this? I re-emphasize **YAWN**.
    Canon really needs to drop the whole 1D/1Ds distinction. It's a myth that a given camera can only have either full frame/high resolution OR fast burst rate. Why can't it have both? This is how they are able to sell one of each to each photographer, when really you should only need one...period. They shouldn't release another camera until they can make a definitive Mark IV that does everything the 1D and 1Ds did in the Mark III, and then some. I'm talking both full frame and high speed. Why shouldn't you get both when you buy a professional camera?
     
  6. Why can't it have both?​
    Of course they can do it. The only question is which route is more profitable.
    Happy shooting,
    Yakim.
     
  7. I wonder how much video capabilities is adding to the cost of the newest DSLR's these days? The high ISO capabilities maybe something I would be willing to pay for but I am not so sure about video.
     
  8. Video = pretty much free, it's mostly software thing now that live view sensor readout is common anyway. Think about p&s cameras, they've had video for years across the price range.
     
  9. Sorry Hal - I didn't pick up on that. Personally I think Canon is missing a growing market. Just as they have dual use of the full frame sensor in the 1DS3 and the 5D bodies, why not make a low-cost body using the 1.3 (aps-H) sensor from the 1D series? The larger 1.3 sensor would provide for further increases in mp but also allow for larger pixels allowing for lowered noise levels.
    Mark - I agree with you about the dubious need for video. Give me clean output at higher ISO. I don't need a zillion mp or video, cell phone, ipod, et.al. built-in features. I just want a quality camera.
     
  10. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    I agree with you about the dubious need for video.​
    The 1D line has always been intended for professional PJs and sports photographers. Video is incredibly useful in these markets. Although I probably won't be anything new immediately, the video feature gives me the ability to both shoot stills and a brief interview in the locker room. For PJs on the street, with most news outlets now using online video, it's a terrific addition.
     
  11. "(up to 102400 in H3 mode) with an advanced noise reduction system helps ensure sharp, low-noise images even in low-light situations. "


    This sounds very familiar. As a matter of fact I think I saw the same thing on a Nikon D3x spec sheet !
     
  12. "Just as they have dual use of the full frame sensor in the 1DS3 and the 5D bodies"
    It is my understanding that the 1DsIII and 5D sensors are not identical.
    If Canon have misjudged the needs of the target market for the 1DIV, then their sales figures will quickly tell them so. I doubt if they are particularly interested in what those of us who won't be buying the camera think about it. I include myself in that group because (a) I have no particular use for the 1.3-factor format, whereas I do have a use for FF and 1.6-factor, (b) experience using the EOS-1V with the PB-E2 taught me that I don't want a camera that big and heavy, and (c) whilst I am prepared to spend quite a lot of money on my hobby, my utility for money exceeds my utility for kit at that price, especially when it is still evolving quite fast. So I'll not be trying to tell Canon how they should have designed the 1DIV.
     
  13. "It is my understanding that the 1DsIII and 5D sensors are not identical."
    That's correct Robin. They are very similar but not identical.
     
  14. good point Jeff and Kari and Steve. I guess if they give me clean output at high ISO I won't mind that I am not using the video feature - it certainly wouldn't be the only camera feature not fully utilized by me.
     
  15. If you want 10fps, a 1.3 crop factor helps: the mirror is smaller, so you can flap it up and down faster. 10fps and a full-frame mirror is obviously tricky.
     
  16. If you want 10fps, a 1.3 crop factor helps: the mirror is smaller, so you can flap it up and down faster. 10fps and a full-frame mirror is obviously tricky.​
    Just to set the record straight, Canon must have solved the flapping mirror problem for their 1984 F1 High Speed camera that shot at 14 FPS. And around 2000 with theEOS 1vHS that also shot at 10 FPS.
     
  17. I'll second with another big Yawn. I'm just surprised Canon didn't switch to a new battery and charger. the good thing about this is the folks that were disappointed in their Mark IIs performance will now be taking their Mint In Box Mark 2 and 2ns out of the closet to sell, since the IV is waaaaaaaaay better. If you thought 8fps out of focus was hot, just wait until you seen 10fps OOF. lol
     
  18. "I'm just surprised Canon didn't switch to a new battery and charger."
    What's wrong with the battery system on the MKIII (and now MKIV)? It's lighter, more powerful, Li-Ion vs NIMH, and is "Smart". I see no down side when compared to MKII and earlier battery systems.
     
  19. "I'm just surprised Canon didn't switch to a new battery and charger."
    What's wrong with the battery system on the MKIII (and now MKIV)? It's lighter, more powerful, Li-Ion vs NIMH, and is "Smart". I see no down side when compared to MKII and earlier battery systems.​
    Steve: You may be missing the point. Some people say you can't "read" sarcasm. I disagree. I think sarcasm translates very well into text, as long as the audience knows how to read inflection.
     
  20. Darn - that's twice today Hal. I'm just too literal. Maybe switching to Decaf will help.
     
  21. Video shot with a 1dm4 at ISO 6400.
    http://vincentlaforet.smugmug.com/Laforet-Videos/Nocturne-Canon-1DMKIV-Video/10024122_sqhwE#686345820_EeDCa-A-LB
     
  22. I sure this will be exciting to some but pretty boring to me. Despite the vast range of Canon cameras they still don't make exactly what I want, which would be a smaller, weathersealed 5D II with a pop-up flash. They could strip out half of the stupid functions and I wouldn't care. Why do Canon have to build their cameras and lenses so big?
     
  23. ... I'm just surprised Canon didn't switch to a new battery and charger. the good thing about this is the folks that were disappointed in their Mark IIs performance will now be taking their Mint In Box Mark 2 and 2ns out of the closet to sell, since the IV is waaaaaaaaay better. If you thought 8fps out of focus was hot, just wait until you seen 10fps OOF. lol​
    • Do your homework. The new AF system looks fantastic.
    http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/controller?act=GetArticleAct&articleID=3107
    • And seriously, the battery... the new ones are much much better than the old ones... My 4mp 1d gets maybe 300-400 shots on a battery if I'm conservative. My friend's Mark III gets +-4000 shots on a battery that's half the size and weight. That means taht it would take me ~13 old 1d batteries to get the same amount of shots in ONE Mark III/IV style battery. Yeah. I'm not complaining.
    • Also, to those talking about a smaller mirror making the camera able to do 10fps - that is nonsense; all the 1d series cameras have a full 35mm mirror, it's just the prism that's masked.
     
  24. I like it, but I will still be waiting to see the specs on the 1Ds Mark IV--after which I will have to decide whether knocking off a convenience store is worth the risk, just so that I can have the latest and greatest.
    --Lannie
     
  25. [[Just to set the record straight, Canon must have solved the flapping mirror problem for their 1984 F1 High Speed camera that shot at 14 FPS.]]
    The "solved" the problem, Peter, by not letting the mirror move at all.
    http://lnk.nu/mir.com.my/11pv.htm

    40% transmission rate to the recording media through the Pellicle mirror .
    http://photonotes.org/cgi-bin/photo-entry.pl?id=Pelliclemirror
     
  26. 16mp will produce an excellent print larger than 95% of all photographers will ever need.
     
  27. Michael "do your homework" that's funny. Don't you bother to real the follow-up comments relating to my sarcasm before posting?
    My point is related to human behavior, I read it here in posts on photo.net all the time, and I work with a guy with same idiotic attitude, that the camera and lens is the reason for his crappy pics, so folks that bought a previouis 1d, 1d2, 20d etc and were dissapointed in their results, well this latest whiz bang model 4 will surely make my photography better. It's the magic bullet syndrome. People that don't get the magic bullet syndrome don't have a clue why I bought a "5 year old camera" (1d2 with 10,000 shuuter acts like new in box) lol
    Yes, that's a really nice video, shot professionally by people who knew what they were doing well before the Mark 1 was on the drawing board....could the same video have been shot with the Rebel 500 ti? the avg. joe idiot looks at that video and thinks he will do that if he can only get a mark 4...and that's what the marketing is aimed at. I'm just happy there are photographers and hobbyists willing to ride on the upgrade bus and keep Canon going...
     
  28. and poof the video is taken down, "Canon's request" wow
     
  29. Brett W. wrote: "and it's only $5,000 - I think I'll pick several up on the way home"
    Well, won't just about EVERYBODY (who IS anybody, that is)?
     
  30. Hal Bradbury wrote: "The 1D-Mark IV should have the 21MP sensor from the 5D Mark II AND it should be able to shoot 10 FPS. Anything less is just a big *YAWN*"
    That's what I say, I was out shooting some sunset photos with my 5D MkII the other day and I was just DYING for 10 FPS!
     
  31. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    The camera wasn't intended for you. I don't know why this has to be explained. It's targeted at pro PJs and sports shooters. Not you. Take your yawning to something that might have relevance to you, this doesn't.
     
  32. It's targeted at pro PJs and sports shooters. Not you.​
    This is offensive on so many levels. Where to begin?
    1. Please show me ONE quote from Canon, EVER, that says the 1D line is only for photojournalists and sports shooters.
    2. To say that a product is "targeted" at one audience means that they had to make compromises which are admittedly negative for other audiences. This is marketing tripe and it automatically conceeds shortcomings in the design.
    3. Directly from Canon's press release: "We are proud to announce the camera that will deliver the ultimate in imaging quality to professionals working in all areas of multimedia imaging, whether it's action photography, photojournalism or HD video and cinematography". Now, I don't know if we're all speaking the same language here, but where I come from "Ultimate" means "Last". As in, "It's so good, it's the last one you'll ever need to buy." Noone will ever need or even want a different camera if their interest is professional imaging quality. Does this mean the end of Canon, or are we already anticipating a Mark V?
    4. Also from the press release: "The Canon EOS-1D Mark IV camera will intrigue professional photographers in virtually every category from photojournalism and sports through nature, wedding, portrait and fashion to commercial, industrial and law enforcement." This negates the "target" argument, as Canon is obviously full of marketing hype and trying to push this camera onto anyone stupid enough to buy it.
    5. 1080P HD video: Been there, done that. Although the 5D is already capable of 1080 video at 30 fps, and will soon be updated for 24/25 fps, this is being touted as a new feature on the 1D. However, now it will be worse. Video makes use of wide angles more often than telephoto, which means this is actually BETTER on the 5D.
    6. 10 fps: Hmmm...this is nothing new. Didn't the Mark III do this?
    7. 16MP: Ok, when you combine the 16MP with 10 fps, you get more processing than ever seen in any camera before. But is it enough? Nobody doubts that within 18 months from TODAY, there will be yet another camera that is capable of 20+ MP at 10 fps. This is coming...you better believe it. So don't settle now for something inferior. We should expect this now.
    We've already seen 24.5MP from Nikon, and 10 fps from Canon. 1080P HD video is OLD HAT. Great AF? Done, by both companies. Someone mentioned weather-sealing: Come on, how much do a few gaskets cost? Maybe $10. When are we going to see a camera that finally incorporates all the technology already available in one package and stops jerking us around? If all the top-dollar corporate pros will just stop buying every new gadget, maybe Canon or Nikon will have a reason to make the ULTIMATE camera.
    The problem is the big-money corporate mentality: I can just buy one 1D for shooting fast-frame sports action, but when I need to shoot close portraits I'll just buy a 1Ds to get the most resolution. Since when do you need two cameras to go from the baseball game to the wedding? At $5000 a pop, these new camera releases shouldn't be taken lightly.
    I know this is getting to be a long post, but here's one more point:
    8. Dual DIGIC 4's: The 7D has this, and shoots 18MP @ 8 fps, or 144 MP/s. The Mark IV shoots 16.1MP @ 10 fps, or 161 MP/s, so we know those processors can handle a little more than what the 7D is doing. If the soon-to-be-released 1Ds Mark IV is only to shoot 5 fps, it will have a resolution of ~32MP to make full use of the dual DIGIC 4's.
    Now, why the heck does it take 3 cameras to present all these options to people? Why not simply have 1 camera that makes the most of the dual DIGIC 4's? You could do this using...I don't know...a switch...that can choose between 16MP, 20MP, and 32MP, corresponding to 10 fps, 8 fps, and 5 fps. Also, in the era of full-frame, there's no reason to not have a full-frame sensor in a pro camera. It HAS to be full frame for HD video.
    We've got cameras, we've got sensors, we've got processors, we've got switches. Let's see it, already!
     
  33. Spearhead

    Spearhead Moderator

    Please show me ONE quote from Canon, EVER, that says the 1D line is only for photojournalists and sports shooters.​
    Nobody said "only." That's your word. If you can't accurately quote me, please don't bother. I said "targeted," so here's some quotes you provided on that:
    whether it's action photography, photojournalism or HD video and cinematography
    "The Canon EOS-1D Mark IV camera will intrigue professional photographers in virtually every category from photojournalism and sports through nature, wedding, portrait and fashion to commercial, industrial and law enforcement​
    The way this is stated makes it obvious where it is targeted. Why would they separate out and highlight PJ and sports if not to make the targeting obvious?
    Hmmm, "action" and "pj." Like I said.
    As for the rest of the comments, unless I'm a product manager for Canon, I really don't care. Either a camera does what I want or it doesn't. I don't worry about cameras that meet other people's needs.
     
  34. Well this is a camera I'll likely never own (not a pro sports shooter). But what's interesting to me is the technology.
    We now have clean 12800 iso and emergency 100,000 iso, on an APSH chip. Oh my.
    Let's do some math. An APSC sensor with the same pixel density would have 16Mpix * (1.3/1.6)^2 = 10.5 megapixels. So in theory, with the same technology we could have a 10 Mpix crop body that does 100k iso.
    History shows that technology tends to trickle down from pro models to consumer models, over time. This is exciting.
     
  35. Jeff: Still offensive. I did quote you right. And please don't quote me quoting others. I know what quotes I used.
     
  36. 16mp is deliberate. Pjs don't need even that. What's the point when you are uploading small jpegs to the newsroom? The issue with the older model was not resolution but up to date features.
    If you want a D3x competitor, then the 1Ds4 will be your answer.
     
  37. Put me down for an $1100 1dMk4 with 12,000 actuations off Ebay in 2012. ;)
     
  38. I just like the fact that it shoots at 16 Mp, beating the 12 Mp Nikon D3 by pixels and 1 fps (in normal shooting modes - yes, I know the D3 can shoot at 11 fps a low res.). I also think it was a smart move to add video at the same time they decided to up the number of pixels (which has taken quite a while). I will consider buying it, because in my opinion 16 Mp is plenty. My 12 Mp images can be printed at 40x60 inches (after interpolation in Photoshop) and produce good quality prints. If that's possible, then the 1D4 didn't have to be more than 16 Mp. I LOVE the 26 frame RAW buffer! I wish it were bigger, but THAT'S A BIG BUFFER! Much better than my 14 frame buffer in my 5 D. I'd like to have the ability to shoot fast, and I think it's about time I move up to a truly professional level camera. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll be getting video too. Maybe I'll just get a 7 D, like I was planning. I'd like to have a 7D and a 5 D MkII, and I could probably buy both (and a 24-105 f4 lens) for the same price I'd pay for a 1D Mk4.
    I wish I had more money!
     

Share This Page