Canon announces 1D M4

<p >Canon USA’s website has technical details for the new Canon 1D Mark 4.</p>

<p > </p>

<p ><a href="http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=19584">http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=ModelInfoAct&fcategoryid=139&modelid=19584</a> </p>

<p>Awesome response to the Nikon D3s.<br>

Check out the press release:<br>

<a href="http://www.photoerrant.com/canon-1d-mark-iv-announced/">http://www.photoerrant.com/canon-1d-mark-iv-announced/</a></p>

<p>Unless Canons R&D dept work exceptionally quickly I very much doubt that the 1D MkIV is a response to the D3s.<br>

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.<br>

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.<br>

For most of us we can be grateful that the technology developed for these machines will trickle down.<br>

For the pros or rich hobbyists, at least wait to there have been some real-life tests published from trusted sources.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Un9V">http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Un9V</a><br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Un8F">http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Un8F</a><br>

<a href="http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Un0p">http://www.photo.net/canon-eos-digital-camera-forum/00Un0p</a><br>

3 and counting..... I think we need a sticky.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

<p>and it's only $5,000 - I think I'll pick several up on the way home</p>

<p> </p>

<p>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?</p>

<p>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*</p>

<p><em>"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*"</em><br>

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.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>At this point in time we pretty much have all the technology we'll need for everyday shooting.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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**.</p>

<p>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?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Why can't it have both?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Of course they can do it. The only question is which route is more profitable.</p>

<p>Happy shooting,<br>

Yakim.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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. <br>

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.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I agree with you about the dubious need for video.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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. </p>

 

"(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 !

<p>"Just as they have dual use of the full frame sensor in the 1DS3 and the 5D bodies"</p>

<p>It is my understanding that the 1DsIII and 5D sensors are not identical.</p>

<p>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 © 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.</p>

<p><em>"It is my understanding that the 1DsIII and 5D sensors are not identical."</em><br>

That's correct Robin. They are very similar but not identical.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

<p>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</p>

<p><em>"I'm just surprised Canon didn't switch to a new battery and charger."</em><br>

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.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>"I'm just surprised Canon didn't switch to a new battery and charger."</em><br />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.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>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.</p>

<p>Darn - that's twice today Hal. I'm just too literal. Maybe switching to Decaf will help.</p>

<p>Video shot with a 1dm4 at ISO 6400.<br>

http://vincentlaforet.smugmug.com/Laforet-Videos/Nocturne-Canon-1DMKIV-Video/10024122_sqhwE#686345820_EeDCa-A-LB</p>

<p>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?</p>