Railfan Technology > More Canon 5D Mk IV Rumors

It would seem that announcements are forthcoming from Canon in the next week or so regarding the new Canon 5D Mk IV, on or around August 26.  The leaked specs include 30.4 MP sensor, Digic 6 processing, integrated GPS, NFC, and WiFi (though some info suggests the WiFi is an add-on card), ISO range up to 102K.  If I had to guess we are looking at a camera in the $2800-3200 range.

http://thenewcamera.com/tag/canon-5d-mark-iv/

Canon Rumors has been following this for a while.  I believe some of the WiFi confusion, is that units destined for foreign markets (not under FCC jurisdiction) will be shipped with WiFi and GPS disabled, like the earlier 6D was.  Also, some of the new 7D2 kits are coming with a WiFi accessory ... which (if on the same invoice) was also confusing people.

The announcement is supposed to be made 25 Aug. Only a couple more days to wait. There will be many bad cases of G.A.S. That's Gear Acqusition Syndrome !  I may have to get imunized, or go to the bank !

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/about/newsroom/press-releases/press-release-details/2016/20160825-EOS-b/20160825-EOS-b
 

Ryan Wilkerson
Fair Oaks, CA

Also:
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1274705-REG/canon_eos_5d_mark_iv.html

Used Canon gear set to flood the market....

$3,499.00 for modest upgrades other than 8 additional MP's.

That's almost (2) Nikon D750's with better image quality, or if
you want more MP's vs a healthy 24, there's the D810 which
again, better image quality at a $700 savings.  What you miss
out on, does not necessarily effect your image but the ease of
getting it.

We'l have to wait out the first reports and comparisons but
Canon does not seem to be making a fuss advertising the
improved dynamic range and they've added 8 million more
pixels to the sensor (ie; reduced the size of light thirsty pixels!)

/Mitch

Mgoldman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> We'l have to wait out the first reports and
> comparisons but
> Canon does not seem to be making a fuss
> advertising the
> improved dynamic range and they've added 8 million
> more
> pixels to the sensor (ie; reduced the size of
> light thirsty pixels!)

Mitch ... I don't believe Canon said much of anything about the DR on the 1DX II, or the 80D when they were released either.  However, the new sensors from Canon were right there with Nikon's.  It will be interesting to see what the new "Dual Pixel Raw" opens up on the Canon bodies.  Some are already claiming it will allow for post-production micro focus adjustments, or even a future firmware ugrade that allows for "Dual ISO," which opens up DR significantly, and was only available in the past by using Magic Lantern (but at a cost of resolution).

At least one of Canon's "Explorers of Light" had a video yesterday, where he talked of the much improved shadow detail in the Mark IV.  That would seem to indicate that DR has been improved over the 5D3.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/26/16 08:25 by bioyans.

Mgoldman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Used Canon gear set to flood the market....
>
> $3,499.00 for modest upgrades other than 8
> additional MP's.
>
> That's almost (2) Nikon D750's with better image
> quality, or if
> you want more MP's vs a healthy 24, there's the
> D810 which
> again, better image quality at a $700 savings. 
> What you miss
> out on, does not necessarily effect your image but
> the ease of
> getting it.
>
> We'l have to wait out the first reports and
> comparisons but
> Canon does not seem to be making a fuss
> advertising the
> improved dynamic range and they've added 8 million
> more
> pixels to the sensor (ie; reduced the size of
> light thirsty pixels!)
>
> /Mitch

They won't make a big fuss r.e. the dynamic range improvements because it's not a big deal to most people.

exhaustED Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They won't make a big fuss r.e. the dynamic range
> improvements because it's not a big deal to most
> people.

I disagree - it's the number one cited issue with Canon.

It's the number one reason many Canon users threaten
(and do) leave for Nikon.

Had Canon introduced the Canon 5D Mark IV at $2,299
or even $2,899.00 perhaps the "extras" like GPS, WIFI
and 8 MP with improved focusing may have sufficed.
But... $3,499.00?  To quote from a well played parody
"My $150.00 cell phone has GPS and WIFI"!

Dual pixel would've been ideal for dual ISO (HDR in a
single frame - ala; Magic Lantern), alas, we have instead,
a "dual focus".  Amazing to me that someone willing to
spend $3.499.00 on a camera has not yet mastered the
art of focusing.

As for the improved dynamic range of the 80D and 1DX,
it's only incremental - better, but not as good as the current
crop of old Nikons and Sonys.

/Mitch


https://www.dpreview.com/news/7168986570/canon-shows-dynamism-eos-80d-breaks-new-ground-for-canon-low-iso-dr
"...While the results of the 80D don't appear to quite match up to the best of its peers, this is good news for anyone committed to Canon's EF lens mount."
 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/30/16 05:51 by Mgoldman.

Mgoldman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> exhaustED Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > They won't make a big fuss r.e. the dynamic
> range
> > improvements because it's not a big deal to
> most
> > people.
>
> I disagree - it's the number one cited issue with
> Canon.
>
> It's the number one reason many Canon users
> threaten
> (and do) leave for Nikon.
>
> Had Canon introduced the Canon 5D Mark IV at
> $2,299
> or even $2,899.00 perhaps the "extras" like GPS,
> WIFI
> and 8 MP with improved focusing may have
> sufficed.
> But... $3,499.00?  To quote from a well played
> parody
> "My $150.00 cell phone has GPS and WIFI"!
>
> Dual pixel would've been ideal for dual ISO (HDR
> in a
> single frame - ala; Magic Lantern), alas, we have
> instead,
> a "dual focus".  Amazing to me that someone
> willing to
> spend $3.499.00 on a camera has not yet mastered
> the
> art of focusing.
>
> As for the improved dynamic range of the 80D and
> 1DX,
> it's only incremental - better, but not as good as
> the current
> crop of old Nikons and Sonys.
>
> /Mitch
>
>
> https://www.dpreview.com/news/7168986570/canon-sho
> ws-dynamism-eos-80d-breaks-new-ground-for-canon-lo
> w-iso-dr
> "...While the results of the 80D don't appear to
> quite match up to the best of its peers, this is
> good news for anyone committed to Canon's EF lens
> mount."
>  

If you spend $3499 on a camera there's an argument to say you'd expect the camera to do a pretty damn good job of focussing on its own without the need for the operator do any art-mastering! There are several technologies around at the moment whose purpose it is to give ultra-accurate focus over and above that achieved with 'conventional' focussing.
Which brings me to a general point about modern photography - image quality has advanced to the point where many people have become 'pixel-peepers' and ridiculously pedantic about certain things. You are obviously quite obsessed with taking very high contrast images and so you want to then 'artificially' reveal details in those deep shadow areas. Fine if that's your bag...
Some other people are obsessed with ultra-fine focussing for example...fine, if that's your bag.
However to then obsess and perpetually whinge about the fact that a certain manufacturer isn't pandering to your specific branch of photography is pretty pointless. Just buy the brand that fits your bill - it's pretty pointless if the two main suppliers to the market are identical in their offerings...

 

exhaustED Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You are obviously quite obsessed
> with taking very high contrast images and so you
> want to then 'artificially' reveal details in
> those deep shadow areas. Fine if that's your
> bag...

That is indeed, my bag, lol.  Though, I would not say
I want to "artificially" reveal details - that's what I am
doing now because they are not being adequately
captured.

> Just buy the brand that fits
> your bill - it's pretty pointless if the two main
> suppliers to the market are identical in their
> offerings...

I do not beleive each brand is going after a specific
market.  It's not like when it was Chevy vs Pontiac
where one was the "All American" look vs the other
more of a "European flair".  Seems Canon vs Nikon
is more like Chevy vs Ford. 

I think Sony (/Nikon) just has the better sensor tech
but to your point, Canon likely has better focus features
(spread, cross points, sensitivity and now dual pixel live
view focus).

The catch is most skilled photographers can still get an
in focus photo with either system but no level of experience
can circumvent a sensor that simply does not catpure all
the detail.

And of course, the biggest catch, or gripe, is that switching
from one camera brand to another often extremely expensive.
This is not the point and shoot market - with a DSLR, changing
bodies means changing lens, flashes, and accesorries.

As I stated - had the 5D Mark IV been priced similar to a Nikon
of camparble features  - most users would accept the trade offs
but to be priced a good $1,000.00 more, I think Canon users
expected more for such a high premium. 

'Course - we have yet to see just how much an improvement there
will be with regards to the dynamic range thanks to the placement
(like Sony /Nikon) of the processor TO the sensor vs off sensor
which was the cause of degregation.

/Mitch

BTW - Here's a sample image showing the benefits of the sensor
used with Nikon (D810) vs Canon (5D Mark III) when pushed in post
processing (think underexposed shot, or shadows, or even the ability
to use a lower ISO that could later be pushed): Rather dramatic.


 

---

I agree with you, i.e. both of the brands we're discussing aren't going after a specific market per se, they're just different as they have seen different things as priorities in their product development in recent years. No doubt you amassed a large Canon collection in the past because you preferred Canon for some reason...i think maybe Nikon only relatively recently developed their superior DR technology to Canon, and if that's the case then you were perfectly happy with big C up until that point.
My point earlier was not disputing the extra DR available with Nikons, rather that your personal requirements have become quite 'niche' i.e. with DR as your main 'focus', no pun intended. There are obviously many considerations when evaluating a camera's performance and DR is one. It might be the #1 gripe with Canon as you say, however, many, many satisfied customers are very happy with their Canon cameras and images, myself included; the reason being i want my images to look like the image i saw with my eye at the time, which as far as i can tell, they do, certainly to my satisfaction.
But that's just me, doing the type of photography that i do...which basically doesn't involve taking photos in poor light on a regular basis. Hence i'm perfectly happy with my Canon while you feel the need to change to Nikon.
But you can't blame Canon for this current situation, they sell more cameras than Nikon do!

Some early tests are coming in, and it looks like the 5DIV is holding its own:

http://www.canonwatch.com/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv-high-iso-performance-better-nikon-d810-sony-a7r-ii/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=canon-eos-5d-mark-iv-high-iso-performance-better-nikon-d810-sony-a7r-ii

Early word is that the Mark IV shows about 13.4 stops of DR.  That puts it within half a stop of the Sony A7R II.  Even then, the Canon and Sony may alternate which is better, depending upon which ISO setting your are on.  The 1DX II and 80D are 13.5 and 13.2 respectively, so 13.4 sounds like a reasonable number for the 5DIV.  Some are suggesting, with the dual-pixel RAW, that they are getting another full stop out of the camera in post processing.  Those claims have not yet been verified.

Canon Price Watch is already showing limited discounts on the 5DIV, and if pricing follows that of the earlier 5DS and 5DSR, the introductory price should drop once the initial demand is met.

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/31/16 10:36 by bioyans.