# 1Ds Mark IV & A New "Hybrid Flagship" [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Aug 9, 2010)

```
<p><strong>File this under “I was speaking to….”

<span style="font-weight: normal;"><em>“the person said that Canon’s primary focus with the 1Ds Mark IV was per pixel sharpness and dynamic range.”</em></span></strong></p>
<p>Expect an announcement “soon”.</p>
<p><strong>Hybrid Flagship

</strong>The 2nd part of the same email spoke of  “A dream camera for any pro photographer and cinematographer that needs the ultimate image and movie quality in difficult light environment”</p>
<p>The camera has been in testing for a short time now.</p>
<p><strong>Specs:</strong>

- A lower mp  full frame Sensor

- Dynamic range optimized

- Raw video

- Continuous focus on video mode

- Smaller form factor than 1D series.</p>
<p><strong>CR’s Take

</strong>Does that sound too good to be true? I would have said “yes” a year ago, not now though.</p>
<p>If Canon had spent $5 on market research, they would have discovered there is a massive market for a low megapixel/high iso performance professional hybrid DSLR.</p>
<p>Take this with a big grain of salt. However, such a camera is very possible.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## that1guy (Aug 9, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New *

I really wish that was at least CR2!


----------



## c.d.embrey (Aug 9, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

Lower pixels and a smaller size - maybe Canon will build a camera I'm interested in buying.


----------



## Bob Howland (Aug 9, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

As somebody who has to use Photomatix Pro a lot more with my 5D than I'd like to, I can only applaud Canon's apparent new-found interest in increasing dynamic range.


----------



## catz (Aug 9, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

I want this to be CR3. I am a bit sceptical though. Somehow big corporations always end up screwing up simple things because super-features become mediocrity in a committee. But if Canon is wise, I am really happy for them. It would be "Forget about Red Scarlet" then. I really really hope Canon can do it without screwing it up, from technical standpoint they should have all the capability to a hybrid camera that would even be better than Red One with Epic sensor. The only thing is to the product managers to let the engineers do what they are capable of.

I hope that video optimized means most importantly: good size reduction algorithm to both directions,
no line skipping => no aliasing => no moire => true 1080p resolution instead of the current not so true 1080p. No optical antialiasing filter is needed, it can be all done with mathematics in real time given that there was enough processing power and low enough latency in reading the sensor to interpolate lines vertically and not only interpolate pixels horizontally (that the 5D apparently does atm, the aliasing problem is only to one direction).

The current compression algorithm with the current bitrate (even without raw video) would already provide stellar image quality provided that aliasing would not eat bits for representing fake details that actually do not belong to the scene but raw video would be even better. Of course raw might mean that raw video from HDMI out and recoding with external recorder. For practicality in mind, I would not like to do that most likely, I would be much happier if the camera would just record ProRes at 1920x1080/24p/25p/30p directly or higher resolution and frame rates, even better. For me it would not need to be more RAW than that (ProRes) since that is the format I am doing the editing anyway despite ProRes by no means is uncompressed. It is just compressed little enough to not suffer from problems. Arri Alexa reportedly records in this format, why couldn't Canon? Technically there would be nothing preventing. And it would not need to even be very expensive. The high price on "Professional digital cinema camera manufacturers" comes from low production volumes, and Canon does not have that problem. The rest may be organizational politics.


----------



## nocojoe (Aug 9, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*



Bob Howland said:


> As somebody who has to use Photomatix Pro a lot more with my 5D than I'd like to, I can only applaud Canon's apparent new-found interest in increasing dynamic range.



I feel the same way. But I wish they would make this camera affordable like the 5d series. I am just dreaming though.


----------



## Stuart (Aug 9, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

What might the word hybrid signify? the 5dmk2 is a hybrid slr/video but does not use the term hybrid?


----------



## JLN (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

I'd love for this camera to be real, however if it were to surface I don't think it'd be a 1ds4. The MP count and form factor is suitable for the segment the 1ds series is targetting, i.e. the studio-based pro photographer.

Now, if these things made its way into the 5d3 on the other hand (and subsequently priced for the mortals) we'd be onto gold. It'd make sense too, the 5d2 changed the game with video on a DSLR, why couldn't/wouldn't the 5d3 do the same with some new video optimisations?

Lower MP + higher DR will square it off with the d700 nicely, all it needs is a higher FPS (which it'll get from lower MP + better digic chip) and hopefully better AF.


----------



## kufucius (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New *

Flip, If it's true I'd be saying Hallelujah Praise the Lord!!
I was hoping for such a body (at least just the "lower pixel full frame pro body" part) ever since Nikon chucked out their D3.
Just hated any body that's non "1" after getting used to a "1" body, so EOS 5 is not an option to me @[email protected]


----------



## Isurus (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New *

I'd love to see this be true as well, but I'd actually like it to be in the bigger, 1D-like form factor. Personally, I like the balance of the bigger camera and they feel better in my hands.


----------



## Lee Jay (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*



Canon Rumors said:


> If Canon had spent $5 on market research, they would have discovered there is a massive market for a low megapixel/high iso performance professional hybrid DSLR.



Why does this myth persist? Bigger pixels in the same area may buy you marginally more dynamic range but they won't buy you better high-ISO performance. In fact, more pixels in the same area gets you better high ISO performance *for the same final image size*. That's the key and the source of the myth. People compare at 100% instead of at constant final size. Every test I've done shows that, per unit of area, the tiny 1.5-2 micron pixels in my compacts out-perform the huge 8.2 micron pixels in my 5D, and not by a small amount.


----------



## MadButcher (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

For Pixel-binning it's needs less power with less pixels.
The most simple algorithm and less power consuming is calculating averages.

Example of double in one direction (quad) resolution of HD:

width: 1920 x 2 = 3840.
aspect-ratio of photo: 3:2.
2/3 * 1920 = 1280 (1080 fits in it).
height: 2 * 1280 = 2560
megapixels: 3840 * 2560 = 9,830,400

Example of triple in one direction (nine-times) resolution of HD:
width: 1920 x 3 = 5760
height: 3 x 1280 = 3840
mp: 22,118,400

First example would be perfect for a aps-c camera.
And you get real RGB-pixels in the video-mode, where as the pixels of the camera are only sub-pixels (Bayer-matrix).
In fact it is sRAW.

Second example would be perfect for a full-frame camera.
Although dividing by 3 is not possible with bit-shifting, and block of 3x3 don't contain the same number of R, G or B-subpixels (Bayer-matrix).

Finally a resolution of : 4 x 1920 by 4 x 1280
Blocks of 4x4, can also be done with bit-shifting, would result in a 39,3 megapixel camera (full-frame).
Compared to the 18mp aps-c 7D this could be done.
And a sRAW of 9,8 megapixel is very good!


----------



## ronderick (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

So I guess now instead of the 1D-line and the 1Ds-line, we'll get a new professional flagship model (say, call it the 1Dv-line for now).

Does that mean we'll get a similar setup for the high-end models for serious amateurs? (Aka. 5D-line, 7D-line, and the mythical 3D-line)


----------



## that1guy (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*



ronderick said:


> So I guess now instead of the 1D-line and the 1Ds-line, we'll get a new professional flagship model (say, call it the 1Dv-line for now).
> 
> Does that mean we'll get a similar setup for the high-end models for serious amateurs? (Aka. 5D-line, 7D-line, and the mythical 3D-line)



Stop teasing


----------



## RichT (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*



MadButcher said:


> For Pixel-binning it's needs less power with less pixels.
> The most simple algorithm and less power consuming is calculating averages.
> 
> Example of double in one direction (quad) resolution of HD:
> ...



I see the first option probably being the most ideal for a 1st generation video-stills hybrid camera if it can handle it. One thing that must be taken into account is getting such a huge quantity of data off the sensors fast enough; using a 2x2 sampling matrix for pixel binning only lets you bin a pair of green pixels, R and B can't be binned without "cheating", so you're still scanning 75% of every pixel post-binning on the camera's 16:9 area. But you would get an R,B and binned G value for every 2x2 block, which eliminates the need for interpolation. Detail should be much higher than what you see now.

At 75% you're looking at pushing through numbers of 220 million pixels per second at 30fps and 177 million pixels per second at 24fps (rolling shutter would be horrid with today's sensors, the scanning process would definitely have to be sped up). 

If you started cutting corners and cheated by say, scanning the R and B of only every other 2x2 group you could cut the required number of scanned pixels from 75% to 50%, producing numbers that are a little lower (118 million pixels/sec @24fps). You'd have to interpolate the missing R and B values, but that shouldn't be too hard since all the adjacent 2x2 blocks have them. 

118mp/sec is still a lot but I believe the 7D dual processors can already handle those kind of numbers (a shame they kept the 5D's scanning routine). The sensor would have to be designed to handle the high heat buildup and the scanning process would have to be sped up quite a bit in order to avoid what would be horrible rolling shutter. By contrast the 5D should have to use about 72 million pixels per second for its video mode by omitting 2 of 3 lines (assuming the "bin & skip" routine I think is occurring is correct)

I'm not sure how a 3x3 binning routine would work but if the chip could be wired for binning up to 3 rows in differing patterns I don't see why it couldn't be done. Yes every 3x3 block would be unequal, with either 4 or 5 green pixels and either 1 or 4 R or B pixels but you'd still get a full RGB sampling from every block. After binning you'd be looking at a scan rate of 33% of your 16:9 cropped area. Panasonic MAY be doing something like that with its GH1 but it may be a more primitive routine.

Another option is using a lower mp sensor still and just do a full scan of all its pixels, demosaic and then downsample to 1080 to get your final output. From a video standpoint this is the most desirable option since the AA filter could be used and on Bayer sensors you get the best quality picture from oversampling and downsampling. But how many people would buy, say, a 5 or 6 megapixel camera that would surely not be cheap?

Finally you'd have to consider how to process such a huge amount of data. RAW would sidestep this but would require an insanely fast card to write it to. Another option that would be more affordable may be to have the highest quality mode (2x2 or full scan) available only for, say, 30 seconds. The data could then be unloaded into a large buffer and processed bit by bit (not in realtime). This is what the Casios do for their burst modes. 

We'll see what happens, it'll be interesting


----------



## Justin (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

Lower megapixels than what?

The 1Ds4 which is rumored between 30 and 40 mpx?

Or 

The 1Ds3 or 5D2 which are as we all know at 21 mpx?

For my money Canon will not go backward. That doesn't mean they couldn't produce a new 21 mpx or 24 mpx sensor for this rumored hybrid camera, they just won't be producing a full frame 10-18 mpx camera.


----------



## wuschba (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*



Stuart said:


> What might the word hybrid signify? the 5dmk2 is a hybrid slr/video but does not use the term hybrid?


I want to know this as well - does "hybrid" mean SLR/Video?!


----------



## RichT (Aug 10, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*



wuschba said:


> Stuart said:
> 
> 
> > What might the word hybrid signify? the 5dmk2 is a hybrid slr/video but does not use the term hybrid?
> ...



So would I, it could mean anything from a GH1 wannabe to something like the NEX-VG10. I'd guess something closer to the GH1 with a video optimized EF-S lens with silent focus and stereo mic; making the zoom powered would be especially clever.


----------



## iblogulike (Aug 11, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

I'm not a GH1 fan. The image quality is terrible. Besides, I'll take a FF 5D over the GH1 every time.


----------



## J-Man (Aug 11, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

I like the sound of more dynamic range being a main 
design target for the 1DsIV, and the new hybrid could 
be the much awaited 3D, the 'hybrid' part could be almost anything, In body IS? 5DII body & sensor + 1DIV build quality, A true video/DSLR vs. A DSLR that can take videos.


----------



## RichT (Aug 11, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*



iblogulike said:


> I'm not a GH1 fan. The image quality is terrible. Besides, I'll take a FF 5D over the GH1 every time.



Hehe, well I wouldn't call the IQ *terrible*, it ain't a 5D (what is)? But post-hack the GH1 video is better in good light, Panasonic seems to have a better handle on how to grab video off a sensor. But what I was referring to the was _concept _of the GH1, which was designed with video being more than just a slapped on afterthought. Things like the dedicated movie button, auto-focus designed to work in live view/video, a lens with semi-stepless aperture and silent focusing motors, swivel screen, etc. So take the concept of the GH1 and improve it by offering things like an APS-C sensor, HDMI out, maybe a powerzoom or RAW and it would make a good hybrid. Don't know what to do about the viewfinder. First though Canon's video implementation needs to improve, at least as good as Panasonic's if not better


----------



## ronderick (Aug 11, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*



RichT said:


> Hehe, well I wouldn't call the IQ *terrible*, it ain't a 5D (what is)? But post-hack the GH1 video is better in good light, Panasonic seems to have a better handle on how to grab video off a sensor. But what I was referring to the was _concept _of the GH1, which was designed with video being more than just a slapped on afterthought. Things like the dedicated movie button, auto-focus designed to work in live view/video, a lens with semi-stepless aperture and silent focusing motors, swivel screen, etc. So take the concept of the GH1 and improve it by offering things like an APS-C sensor, HDMI out, maybe a powerzoom or RAW and it would make a good hybrid. Don't know what to do about the viewfinder. First though Canon's video implementation needs to improve, at least as good as Panasonic's if not better



Yeah, Panasonic has a clearer logic with its three main product lines - G for general MFT camera, GH for video-oriented ones, and GF for compact ones. I guess they went even a step further with plans to release professional camcorder AG-AF-100 which is MFT lens compatible. Now they're dabbling with 3D MFT lens... 

But the good thing for Canon is that they're not bounded by the limits of 4/3 sensors (the resolution hardly comes close to FF ones), so there's more room to play with in the future. Also, Canon has a big advantage over Nikon with its experience with camcorder products, so that should come in to play.

Now all they need to figure out if they want to devote a product line <b>dedicated</b> to the DSLR/video combo...


----------



## Peerke (Aug 11, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

Interesting to see the technical stuff that has to improve to be able to make a DLSR suitable for good video. Everytime I say I just want a still camera, people tell me that still camera's will be cheaper with video ???. Yeah right.

Just make a camera with a modern 12 - 16 MP FF sensor, decent AF, 6 FPS, 100% VF 8). Price level somewhere between the 7D and 5DII . Thank you.


----------



## pedro (Aug 11, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

Plus one. A downstripped "6D" aimed towards serious still photographers. FF, 18 MP. Digic V. ISO 100- 25.600, very usable ISO 51.200 (H). @ US$ 2.000


----------



## Peerke (Aug 11, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

Usable ISO 51200 ??????????????? Please read : http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/guest/physical_limits_long.html.

You will know it will be out of the question. For the rest, nice specs and price. I will buy, thank you .


----------



## SMP_Homer (Aug 11, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

Did anyone else mention the missing 'joystick'?


----------



## pedro (Aug 11, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

@Peerke: Thx. I am absolutely not in physics. But I kinda get the idea. Shattered dreams though. But anyway...excellent ISO 3200 are as good as everything, combined with a fast lens there ain't no problem.


----------



## that1guy (Aug 12, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*



SMP_Homer said:


> Did anyone else mention the missing 'joystick'?



Did you mean on the 60D? I think someone might have mentioned it in a different thread, and I think the consensus was that is was on an inner ring inside of the control wheel in the back.


----------



## Rukes (Aug 13, 2010)

*Re: 1Ds Mark IV & A New \*

I would love a "3D" or whatever it will be. 

Just a 1Ds, lower megapixels and features, but has really good low-light capabilities, ESPECIALLY keeping the 1D series auto-focus. Even with the 5D MkII ISO boost over the 1Ds MkIII, it still makes shooting things in motion in low-light at f/2.0 to f/1.2 all the tougher without any good auto-focusing points. 

I'll definately go for the 1Ds MkIV and then if a 3D or an insanely good 5DMkIII come out, "downgrade" to that if the autofocus is good.


----------

