The new Canon Eos 1D MKIV Not "V" Night Video

[KETCH ROSSI]

True, bat for myself I like to speak of what we no as a Fact, and we just HOPE that the AF is as good as they now say it is!

I must say that I would have wished to see a superior improvement on the MP count at list to go over or same as the 7D 18MP, I believe this is surely not too much to ask!

Secondly 10fps is surely fast but also NO improvement here is a bit of a disappointment giving current technology, at list 20fps would have been good.

Burst capability have a very marginal improvement at that.


Glad on the AF improvement, again we hope it will be, and the Screen rez. is also no bad, together with the ISO puts them at par with Nikon.

 

[KETCH ROSSI]

Just so you guys know, The link to the Video on Vimeo, has been Closed by CANON"S request!!

 

[ChrisDauer]

For anyone with many Canon lenses and other accessories as part of the system they shoot with, yes, it will be better than a D3s.

LJ

:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
:thumbs:

Thanks for bringing voice to the thoughts running in my head!

 

[LJL]

:ROTFL::ROTFL::ROTFL:
:thumbs:

Thanks for bringing voice to the thoughts running in my head!

In my own twisted way, I think of it as PC....not just "politically correct", meaning polite and such, but also "perspective control".....:angel::ROTFL:

LJ

 

[rbs100]

if it focuses well (like it is supposed to) the camera should be a hit. but, there are numerous sports shooters, papers, etc that shelled out big bucks on the MK3 only to find out that many of them had issues. so folks who shoot sports professionally are going to sit and wait to see if this camera is the real deal. for those who sold off canon and switched to nikon, i seriously doubt many will come back--it cost just too much given the price of switching the long lenses. 16 mega pixels is better than 12. 1.3X is nice since you can never get 'enough' length when shooting sports. a standard memory buffer that equals a $500 upgrade on a D3 is great. in all ways this camera sounds very nice.

i shot canon professionally for 6 years and loved every second of it--especially the long glass. the MK3 was my mistake--i upgraded two bodies. well i found out were the service center was real quick after having terrible yields due to focus. i bit the bullet and went nikon--and hated that everything was backwards and the long primes cost way too much. but i am not about to sell my gear to go back. maybe the next generation.

 

[LJL]

rbs100,
Sorry to hear about the focus issues you had with the MkIII. Switching back and forth is never a profitable activity. However, if you still shoot sports and use long lenses, going from Nikon to Canon is a much cheaper exercise than the other way.

I had been seriously contemplating going to Nikon when there was not much improvement stuff coming from Canon for a while, and the D3 and D3x have been showing some good results. The 7D did not excite me, due to the too small crop of 1.6x, and lacking the higher end sealing of the 1-series bodies. I was not thrilled until Canon dropped the news of the 1DMkIV. I am eager to see if the AF is as good as they say. It was good to see that they went back to same coverage and control of the MkII cameras, and then improved the crosspoint selection. That sounds very encouraging, but as mentioned, there is a bit of gun-shy feeling, so I am waiting to see some folks put it through the paces, as well as using one myself before jumping to it. My feeling is that it might be done right this time, but will wait a bit to be more sure.

LJ

 

[rbs100]

LJL

i would love to hear what you think of it. i will also 'trust' rob galbraith this time around as he did call the issue on the MK3 and i didn't believe his analysis at first. i have done the math (via excel) to determine what it would 'cost' me to go back to canon if the Mk 4 is the real deal. the one lens i do love in the nikon group is the 200-400. for daylight, it just kills having a fixed focal length for what i cover--PGA, MLB, football, Soccer. so that would be the hard one to give up and cause me to really think this through. but you are correct, canon has much better pricing on the telephotos than nikon. also you can rent that 800 for offshore surfing and other events requiring length. just have to wait until early next year to hear the verdict. my guess is the first wave will be all positive as it will come from folks who fork out $5K and want to believe the camera is great. in the second wave of user reviews is where the flaws will show up, if any.

 

[2x2]

LJ,
I do think Canon and Nikon are closing the gap on MF, but MF keeps evolving too. Now all we need is more cash!

MF is not really evolving all that much. Yes, the S2 promised to blow some dust off of the other player's offerings but with only two usable ISO stops I doubt it will make much of an impact.
Don't tell me Leica is still working on improving the firmware to that regard. They still haven't figured that one out with their digital M line of cameras.
Trust me, I'm a big Leica fan. Just not a fanboy who blindly ignores reality.

 

[fultonpics]

so, i am hearing the camera is super. some of the agencies have a few already and the guys i know say they are pretty good.

 

[2x2]

Agree totally that Leica's new S lenses will surely bring a new level of Image quality and detail to the mix, but then again Leica has always been at the very top of Glass manufacturing, even in the Cinema world.

When it comes to 35mm cameras Leica glass is ahead of the game by a huge margin. No matter how good the S2 lenses are or will be, when it comes to the MF market the difference won't be much at all. The level of quality from all MF companies is completely different to what's available in 35mm.

Btw, Phase One made a deal with Schneider-Kreuznach and will be offering SK lenses soon for their new body. Frankly, as good Leica lenses are, compared to SK glass they are only a second choice.

 

[wayne_s]

so, i am hearing the camera is super. some of the agencies have a few already and the guys i know say they are pretty good.

My 7D's AF performance is much better than 1d2n at tracking birds in flight and I'm sure the 1d4 shares a lot of the same tracking functionality as the 7d so it should be excellent.Coupled with the new iFCL tech which nails the proper exposure much more by taking into account the color and also using the focusing sensors info to figure out what part of the scene is the subject and then calculating proper exposure for that part.
Barring any screwups, the 1d4 should be an excellent camera.

 

[KETCH ROSSI]

When it comes to 35mm cameras Leica glass is ahead of the game by a huge margin. No matter how good the S2 lenses are or will be, when it comes to the MF market the difference won't be much at all. The level of quality from all MF companies is completely different to what's available in 35mm.

Btw, Phase One made a deal with Schneider-Kreuznach and will be offering SK lenses soon for their new body. Frankly, as good Leica lenses are, compared to SK glass they are only a second choice.

Yes I'm aware of P1 various deals, and even so I don't pretend to know MF glass, as I don't I still firmly believe that Leica's glass will outperform anything out there as it has in any other format, to include the M and R mounts, and especially with Cine Glass, very complex type of glass, much more demanding then Still glass, so for this I say and believe that their new S2 glass, will be equally impressively Sharp, contrasty, and very well controlled in CA, pincushion distortions, Flaring and vignetting, yet again, I'm new to MF and have little to no experience with it, so so much to learn, and talking about Leica's new MF S2 glass only from experience on their other Glass.

 

[KETCH ROSSI]

My 7D's AF performance is much better than 1d2n at tracking birds in flight and I'm sure the 1d4 shares a lot of the same tracking functionality as the 7d so it should be excellent.Coupled with the new iFCL tech which nails the proper exposure much more by taking into account the color and also using the focusing sensors info to figure out what part of the scene is the subject and then calculating proper exposure for that part.
Barring any screwups, the 1d4 should be an excellent camera.

Newer technology always will bring added control and better capabilities then older model, in this case even a None Pro camera body can outperform in some aspects an older Pro body.


The 1D IV however has a completely redesign focusing system and should be far superior to that of the 7D no doubt, or at list we hope so, Canon should have learned their lesson with the total initial failure of the 1D III AL Servo focus problem.

 

[wayne_s]

Not sure what you mean by far superior?
The new 7D and 1d4 share the same new AF and intelligent metering technology with the same dual digic 4 chips. The differences are:
1. more AF sensors 52 vs. 36
2. cross pt sensors are functional with f5.6 or faster lenses vs. f2.8 for the 7d
3. speed, 10fps vs. 8
other non-AF related differences
4. bigger pro tank body vs. smaller prosumer body
5. dual card slots vs. single card slot
6. 16MP APS-H sensor vs. 18MP APS-C sensor, better high iso less reach vs.more reach and poorer high iso.
7. slightly faster flash sync speed
8. $5k vs $1.7k
What I was trying to say earlier is that the new AF and intelligent exposure metering system which will be common for 7d, 1d4, and 1ds4 looks excellent and has fixed some of the problems identified in the 1d3 AF system. The 7d has all the custom functions for AF like the 1 series.
As LJ was saying earlier, the 7d is an interesting new unique dslr system which is between the 50d line and the 1d line. I have a 1ds3,5d, 1d2n and now a 7d. I understand wanting a pro body for out in the field. I think the 7d is a good option for a 2nd body, one which would give you much more reach which is needed for things like bird photography.I like carrying both a FF camera for landscape and a crop camera with fast AF for wildlife/birding. I went with the 7D instead of 1d4 gaining extra reach and saving $3.3k for use soon when I upgrade my 1ds3 to a 1ds4.With the recent shorter life cycle of pro dslrs, one has to take into account more the rapid depreciation of these bodies which is expensive. Not quite as bad as MFDB but then they get special upgrade path deals.

 

[KETCH ROSSI]

Only that in the 1D series bodies superiority is expected and a given since not only is a PRO body but you also pay TOP $$$ for it.

 

[2x2]

Yes I'm aware of P1 various deals, and even so I don't pretend to know MF glass, as I don't I still firmly believe that Leica's glass will outperform anything out there as it has in any other format, to include the M and R mounts, and especially with Cine Glass, very complex type of glass, much more demanding then Still glass, so for this I say and believe that their new S2 glass, will be equally impressively Sharp, contrasty, and very well controlled in CA, pincushion distortions, Flaring and vignetting, yet again, I'm new to MF and have little to no experience with it, so so much to learn, and talking about Leica's new MF S2 glass only from experience on their other Glass.

Again, in 35mm photography the differences in lens quality from brand to brand can be huge. It's relative easy for Leica glass to be far ahead.

MF market is different. It is a very high quality and therefore high priced market to begin with. You won't find the same quality differences as in 35mm.
S2 glass might be better than some but only marginally compared to the competition in the MF market. So marginally in fact that their higher price will be for many pros the deciding factor in not purchasing the S2. If one is already working with top notch products, it makes no sense to spend more money on something that might not be better by much if any at all.
In addition to that comes the sensor situation. In MF the quality is so high to begin with that the weakest link becomes the sensor. Why spend more money on something that will out resolve the sensor and hence won't show a difference at all. In the 30 - 40MP range that is a possibility. Moving up to a P65+ digital back, current lenses won't be able to out resolve a sensor. But in that realm one can't use anything Leica anyway.

Regarding cine lenses, it looks like Leica won't play a role. http://www.easymonitoring.ch/handelsregister/leica_cinema_gmbh_859115.aspx

Addendum: Since as of now the S2 has only two usable ISO stops to offer, the quality of their glass becomes redundant. Who cares about excellent lenses when excessive noise will ruin the shot anyway?

 

[LJL]

Wayne,
I agree with your thinking about the 7D being a very good option. I do think about it as a possible second or third body to the 1DMkIV(s) I use for shooting, especially where a bit more reach may be desired. What I have found to be difficult (for me) is the switching functional design (control layout, etc.) between the 1-series and anything else Canon has in the heat of shooting. I really like the way the 1-series bodies operate, handle, and are laid out. Probably why I have three bodies now that I shoot all the time. As my type of shooting starts to change, I may just go with one 1DMkIV, the 1DsMkIV when it comes out, and maybe a 7d as the back-up in the bag. Truth be told, if I have three bodies, I will use all of them when shooting, so I may wind up with two 1DMkIV bodies again, as much to keep the familiarity of control layout, etc.

I had seen a blog review by Jeff Ascough (link posted on DPReview), and he seems pretty impressed with the 1DMkIV, its new AF, better AWB and overall performance.....and he was shooting with a pre-production model at one of his weddings. Not that his testimony should influence one either way, but as a working pro wedding photog, he stakes a lot of his reputation on the performance of the gear he uses, much like many of us do, and so far, he is liking what Canon has done....maybe enough to not worry about the FF version....but my bet is the 1DsMkIV will be another tough camera to ignore ;-)

LJ

 

[wayne_s]

Yes, I find the 7D's AWB to be a lot more accurate than my 1ds3's especially in indoor lighting situations. I also feel that the colors are slightly better, most noticeably with better greens.
The new 920,000 dot 3 inch displays are so much better than the old lower res ones.
I understand preferring the same consistent layout of controls on the various cameras.
The 7d has a new layout of controls and menu system with some nice programmable features.
Not sure how close it is to the new 1d4. I think Canon has been working on making the layouts and UI alot more consistent between their product lines as this has been a common complaint from users for awhile now.

 

[KETCH ROSSI]

Yes I was informed of their decision, but fortunately there are many Leica used Cine glass to go around

Yeah unfortunately the S2 is already two years behind, but the Glass still can bring use to the market, as adaptors will continue to be used by Pro's, but I definitely dislike using them, and like to choose a complete system.

On my tests some MF lenses have actually shown less resolution then some 35mm lenses, sure the circle of light that they cover is off course much bigger, but they do suffer of the same issues as lenses in the 35mm format do, again, not discussing much here as I have very limited on field shooting with MF, but tests on a projector have shown the Leica S2 glass to be great, too bad if the S2 camera turns out not to be up to it, just remember that not every body shoots or cares for High ISO, I in fact in twenty and some years of Photography and Cinematography I never shot anything over 400 ISO.

 

[2x2]

Yes I was informed of their decision, but fortunately there are many Leica used Cine glass to go around

Yeah unfortunately the S2 is already two years behind, but the Glass still can bring use to the market, as adaptors will continue to be used by Pro's, but I definitely dislike using them, and like to choose a complete system.

On my tests some MF lenses have actually shown less resolution then some 35mm lenses, sure the circle of light that they cover is off course much bigger, but they do suffer of the same issues as lenses in the 35mm format do, again, not discussing much here as I have very limited on field shooting with MF, but tests on a projector have shown the Leica S2 glass to be great, too bad if the S2 camera turns out not to be up to it, just remember that not every body shoots or cares for High ISO, I in fact in twenty and some years of Photography and Cinematography I never shot anything over 400 ISO.

Well, I hope you tested digital MF lenses and not older film ones.
Regarding your 400 ISO experience ... doesn't really matter. What matters is what Leica from the get-go (over a year ago) promised and still hasn't delivered upon. The first revolutionary MF camera that offers DSLR like easiness of use and can shoot up to ISO 1600.
Having said that, to give respect where respect indeed is due, Leica did bring us something new and exciting. The S2 is the very first weather-sealed studio camera. Hurray!

:ROTFL: