# Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Achieves Best Canon Sensor Score at DXO



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2016)

And there it is:
https://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-IV-Sensor-Review-Game-changer

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2016)

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2016)

I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...

Granted, this is DXO, and I trust them about as much as I trust our major parties' presidential candidates, but this is very encouraging if corroborated by others.

- A


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 14, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...
> 
> Granted, this is DXO, and I trust them about as much as I trust our major parties' presidential candidates, but this is very encouraging if corroborated by others.
> 
> - A


It has +2ev DR at base iso and stays ahead of 5d3 and 5d2 at all ISO's. That is a big sensor improvement.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> It has +2ev DR at base iso and stays ahead of 5d3 and 5d2 at all ISO's. That is a big sensor improvement.



Landscapers who went in on the 5DS for detail are probably drooling at the prospect of the 5DS2 with a similar on-chip ADC bump in base ISO DR.

+1-2 DR stops won't let you retire the ND grads or eliminate the need to composite shots for HDR, blending, etc. but it's still useful.

- A


----------



## drjlo (Sep 14, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...


*Shrug* I currently use both 5D III and Sony A7R, which has DXO DR rating of 14.1 Evs, even higher than 5D IV, but this DR difference currently has no bearing on which camera I pick up. 
What I really, really want from Canon is a full-frame, mirrorless, smaller camera with this new sensor tech, which I would buy in an instant ;D


----------



## Act444 (Sep 14, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning



Not this one, at least...

As a 5D3 owner, there is one area the 5D4 falls short for me and that is lack of noticeable improvement in resolving power and sharpness - despite the resolution bump. The other stuff is nice, but ultimately end IQ is what I'm after. Other than the 5DSR, I'm better off sticking with what I've got and upgrading lenses instead...


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 14, 2016)

Act444 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning
> ...



How are you determining that? It runs counter to common sense.


----------



## IglooEater (Sep 14, 2016)

Sweet! I was hoping for a solid improvement . On the other hand I'm unsure if DXO has any influence on Canon shooters decisions...

On a side note, give it to dxo to think the 5D IV's predecessor is the 1D III... :


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Simple. I presume Act444 wanted more pixels in the 5D4 than 30 MP. 

- A


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Sep 14, 2016)

Act444 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning
> ...



Tests are fun to discuss, and this one from DXO seems pretty close.
I have the 5DS and sold the 5D III. The 5D IV came late yesterday.
I took one jpg test shot last night and was blown away by the improvement. The biggest thing I noticed is how well the reds held together at ISO 12800. Contrast was better and edge detail without colors bleeding was impressive. The DR improvement is noticeable. 
I am very happy with my decision.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 14, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Act444 said:
> ...



Not so simple. I expect your presumption is wrong, that is why I asked.

I suspect Act444 is drawing his conclusions from posted images on the internet that have not been processed with optimal software. If he is looking at comparison shots have they been processed in the same software and were they processed the same or optimally?


----------



## Act444 (Sep 14, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Act444 said:
> ...



Honestly, I'd have preferred a more modest MP boost (say, 24) and a 1-2 stop improvement on high ISO. But, if you've (Canon) chosen to push me towards more MP instead (with the direction of 5D line), ok fine - but I want more sharpness and detail as well. At a minimum, the same if not more pixel-level crispness. From the RAW files I've looked at so far, this is where the 5D4 disappoints me somewhat. I'm sure it's a fine camera, but it's not worth a $3500 upgrade to me at this point.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 14, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



I downloaded the RAW off DPR's site and played around with the files myself in DPP 4.5. Looked at studio shots for 5D4, 5D3, 5DSR and 1DX2. Please note that this is just my PERSONAL perspective, and I recognize we have different requirements, perspectives, pet peeves, etc. 

If later a "5D4 R" or variable-AA filter 5D4 shows up - sign me up! (At the right price of course)

But back to the topic of DR - I wasn't one of those who cried about it, but glad to see the improvement nonetheless.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 14, 2016)

Act444 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Thanks for replying. I can't help but feel there is something amiss though, there is no way on earth for same sized output a new 30mp camera isn't as sharp or able to resolve as much as a four year old 20mp camera.

Would you mind saying which files and screen sizes have made you draw your conclusions? Like I say, something seems amiss.


----------



## LSXPhotog (Sep 14, 2016)

Some of the posts in here might break the Internet. LOL Some people will never be happy with what Canon delivers...just continue worrying about your gear and taking awful images and blaming the gear. (Hint: it's not the gear)


----------



## xps (Sep 14, 2016)

*Re: DXO 5D4 Sensor Test = 13.6 DR / 91 overall*



LSXPhotog said:


> Some of the posts in here might break the Internet. LOL Some people will never be happy with what Canon delivers...just continue worrying about your gear and taking awful images and blaming the gear. (Hint: it's not the gear)


 

It took me 6000€ to discover that Canon is not producing an awful bad gear. Some peers do have heat problems and an awful bad service. And that is more limitationg than an minor IQ, most of us do not realize when they look at great shots Canon gear produces.


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Sep 14, 2016)

so i think we all owe CANON a big TIME SORRY FOR BASHING YOU THESE PAST YEARS
"the 1s who bashed them" they have been improving just at there own pace, there sensors can now ONLY get better" dont u all agree but wow, so we can safely say we have as good if not better sensor in our 5D4 as the 1DX if not better?
im proud too had dropped 35-00-4700 on my possibyly last DSLR camera


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2016)

BigAntTVProductions said:


> so i think we all owe CANON a big TIME SORRY FOR BASHING YOU THESE PAST YEARS
> "the 1s who bashed them" they have been improving just at there own pace, there sensors can now ONLY get better" dont u all agree but wow, so we can safely say we have as good if not better sensor in our 5D4 as the 1DX if not better?



I don't know if I would go that far, but the 5D4 sensor closely matching the 1DX2 sensor performance despite +10 MP is an impressive feat. 

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2016)

dilbert said:


> What happened to the DxO bashing?
> 
> To me it is very interesting that the 5D4 has been reviewed so quickly. How long did it take for the 5Ds models to appear on DxO?
> 
> You might even say that Canon has recognized how important it is for DxO to get their review completed sooner rather than later.



Sensor tests are pretty quick, usually within a week or two of cameras shipping. *Lens* testing at DXO is what takes forever -- they took a good 5+ months to retest their Canon glass on the 5DS R, and they took a full year to test a single lens on the A7R II.

Keep in mind also that DXO is the biggest name in the sensor game, and everyone has grown to expect quick testing of new sensors from them. But there are a jillion lens testers out there, so they're in less of a hurry on that front.

- A


----------



## sebasan (Sep 14, 2016)

The "bash" on DxO was always in their scores, not in their measures.
In this case, comparing with the scores of the A7RII and D810, the 5DIV scores and overall score seem short for me.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 14, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...



... why? If they aren't planning on upgrading, it's because 4 doesn't offer anything compelling over 3. A convoluted, secret sauce sensor score posted at DXO probably change that for most people.

I ordered a 1Dx (used) after 5D4 specs came out. I don't regret that choice. The sensor is but one subassembly that makes up a camera. I think the marginal differences in two to three performance parameters between competitors' sensors gets an inordinate amount of play relative to the real world difference they make, and the amount they matter to most consumers.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 14, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...
> ...



Understood, but remember that folks do (or do not) upgrade for a ton of reasons. 

Some are in on day one strictly based on specs/features (Does it use the video format I prefer? How many f/8 AF points does it have for my birding? etc.), while others value real-world use and reviews to make sure the product delivers on its specs, while yet another group of people absolutely love what currently shoot with and _just want to know how much better the sensor is._
*
If you are in that third group*, DXO just stated (and I'm hoping others will corroborate) that this is a rig worth upgrading for. It appears to be a considerable upgrade over the 5D3 in (obviously) resolution, low light performance and dynamic range. If you care about those things or run into the limits of what the 5D3 can do in those metrics, this may a rewarding upgrade for you. 

But if you're in the other camps -- let's say you're in the 'review' group and you want to know the AF hit rate, or if you're just a spec junky who wants a 30 MP FF rig with DPAF, this DXO report (and other sensor testers's work) may do nothing for you, I agree.

- A


----------



## hajiaru (Sep 14, 2016)

LSXPhotog said:


> Some of the posts in here might break the Internet. LOL Some people will never be happy with what Canon delivers...just continue worrying about your gear and taking awful images and blaming the gear. (Hint: it's not the gear)



mostly video guys are disappointed in the camera after waiting 5 years too much 4k crop they couldn't frame the subject and New DiGiC 6+ = 4K in MJPG no proper codec no faster memory cards  ;D ;D ;D ;D Why do u present ur product in 1080p when it shoots 'crop' 4K


----------



## Big_Ant_TV_Media (Sep 14, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> BigAntTVProductions said:
> 
> 
> > so i think we all owe CANON a big TIME SORRY FOR BASHING YOU THESE PAST YEARS
> ...



i didnt say it was but it does closely match it??


----------



## Refurb7 (Sep 14, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...



Not me. I never found the dynamic range or low light performance of the 5D3 to be lacking, so the 5D4 is nice but won't make me rush to upgrade. If and when I upgrade to the 5D4 I will enjoy the benefits, but until then the 5D3 is quite a fine camera. Does everything I need. The fact that the 5D4 is 2 ounces lighter is more interesting to me than the sensor.


----------



## Refurb7 (Sep 14, 2016)

IglooEater said:


> On a side note, give it to dxo to think the 5D IV's predecessor is the 1D III... :



That is DxO logic and accuracy at its finest! Good to know that the 5DIV is a real improvement over its predecessor, the 1DIII.


----------



## IglooEater (Sep 14, 2016)

dilbert said:


> What happened to the DxO bashing?



It's still here; you must have missed my post on page 1.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 15, 2016)

KeithBreazeal said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



High ISO jpeg processing seems one area where significant improvements are still being made.


----------



## scyrene (Sep 15, 2016)

Act444 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



2 stops at high ISO may not be possible. I've seen it repeated here fairly often (by people I pay attention to) that at the highest ISO settings, we're approaching the physical limits of what is possible (caveats: raw images, with Bayer-filtered silicon sensors).


----------



## East Wind Photography (Sep 15, 2016)

lot of camera for your money, including a sensor that boasts the best DxOMark sensor score to date for a Canon DSLR

What a turn off. Like i would buy a camera just because dxomark scores the sensor high. They are a bit full of themselves to even say that in their article. So done with them.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 15, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Sure, but those people would not have already made up their minds, so there is no internal struggle with "but I wasn't going to upgrade."

I may have misinterpreted what you wrote as suggesting this DXO post would alter people's decisions.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 15, 2016)

dilbert said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



Those would be covered in the statement from the second half of my post: "two to three performance parameters"

Will this camera provide slightly better photos in edge cases? Sure. In general use? I don't think those numbers are going to bust open barn doors.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 15, 2016)

Act444 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



If you don't want the camera for whatever reason that is fine by me, but to compare different sized pixels on a one to one basis is an entirely fallacious concept. The 5D MkIV sensor vastly out performs the 5D MkIII sensor.

Please post a screen shot of the comparison images that drove you to your conclusions.


----------



## Cali Capture (Sep 15, 2016)

As a 5dMarkII user I obviously Pre-ordered the IV. All I can say is it's a HUGE upgrade!
Form factor alone makes it feel like a whole new generation of camera. 
Touchscreen menus= much faster workflow, instant focus check by finger spread zoom on higher res. screen
Autofocus: was a center point and recompose shooter- now trusting the wider AF points much more- That's not east thing to change, but the IV is really allowing me to "let GO"
30 is better that 20mp- just ask someone with 50! My guess is that most images in the future will end up on a 4K TV, and those screens will continue to get larger ( 70" and 80" are common now) and the MP race is not over yet!
Nightvision Camera- I threw on the new 35mm f/1.4 II and shot around my house with the lights off, dim Nightlights allowed auto focus, I then switched off autofocus and could shoot handheld MF in the near dark, ans see where I was going! You don't need a lot more ISO than that!
HDR features are great, Stills and Video
Timelapse anyone?
I've been buying great canon glass since I got late into the Mark II, I now feel like I have a body to take advantage of those lenses and look forward to a new 50L and the 16-35mmIII. This is a great camera and if you make money with your photos you will probably get one (outside the DX and RS users). I can see the argument for waiting for a price drop if your on the MkIII. But one comment I heard makes sense, You get the bottom half of the fudge sunday by waiting. It's the "Cumulative" that makes the IV worth buying, and that has always been why the 5D series has been the best selling DSLR!


----------



## Ozarker (Sep 15, 2016)

Act444 said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning
> ...



Doesn't matter to me at all. I am extremely happy with my 5D Mark III. Extremely.

I'll be waiting until two years into the Mark V cycle. That doesn't bother me a bit either.

More great glass is on my list before a body upgrade.

I can't afford to be as big a Fanboy as I'd like to be.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 15, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> Please post a screen shot of the comparison images that drove you to your conclusions.



The following shots are from DPP. Both feature a comparison window featuring the studio scene pic from DPR. RAW files downloaded and loaded into DPP 4.5. 5D3 pic on the left, 5D4 pic on the right. Noise reduction turned off, sharpening set to 0 on both images (option unchecked). Focus is on the green foliage for reference. You can also see that the FL & exposure on both is the same (1/40, f5.6, ISO 100, 85mm). 1st shot shows 5D3 shot selected, 2nd shot shows 5D4 shot selected (to show that settings are indeed the same)

Now, at equivalent sizes the 5D4 will have the edge, and the MP difference is still enough to put the 5D4 ahead overall...but when I view both images at 1:1, it seems to me 5D4 has a softer appearance...I dunno, am I seeing things?? Have my eyes turned on me?



> to compare different sized pixels on a one to one basis is an entirely fallacious concept.



...hmm, Is it though? Maybe I'm doing something wrong, but I will next include the 5D3 vs. the 5DS (not the R) to show what I'm getting at here. Unlike with the 5D4, when both are viewed at 1:1 you can CLEARLY see the 5DS resolving detail with similar crispness as the 5D3. This leads me to draw the conclusion that the 5D4 has a stronger AA filter than both the 5D3 AND 5DS...and DPR seems to more or less agree as well:

_"It's a similar story if you compare the 5D Mark IV with the higher resolution EOS 5DS R or even the EOS 5DS, *whose low pass filter appears to be weaker than the IV's.*"_ - DPR 5D4 Review, Image Quality Section. (Emphasis added)


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 15, 2016)

dilbert said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



How does a 30% increase in that score translate to pictures? Is a picture taken in low light going to be 30% better? I don't qualitatively think my photos taken with A7R2 in low light are 50% better than those taken with my 5D3. In fact, in my experience the A7R2 struggles significantly more with focus in low light than does the 5D3, so many of my alpha photos look qualitatively worse (which is sorta what I was getting at with my statement about undue attention given to a few parameters of a single subassy within a larger end item).


Is it saying that in low light, a photo taken with the 5D4 at ISO3000 will look equally as good as one taken with 5D3 at 2300?


----------



## Act444 (Sep 15, 2016)

OK, now including comparisons of the 5D3 and 5DS (again, NOT the R version) to illustrate my above observation. Again, no sharpening or NR in either shot, and two screenshots to show this is the case. 





3kramd5 said:


> How does a 30% increase in that score translate to pictures? Is a picture taken in low light going to be 30% better? Or is it saying that in low light, a photo taken with the 5D4 at ISO3000 will look equally as good as one taken with 5D3 at 2300?



My guess is it means you can expect roughly a 1/3 stop improvement on high ISO shots (in RAW, with no NR applied)?


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 15, 2016)

Act444 said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > How does a 30% increase in that score translate to pictures? Is a picture taken in low light going to be 30% better? Or is it saying that in low light, a photo taken with the 5D4 at ISO3000 will look equally as good as one taken with 5D3 at 2300?
> ...



Well their definition of the score includes:

An SNR value of 30dB means excellent image quality. Thus low-light ISO is the highest ISO setting for a camera that allows it to achieve an SNR of 30dB while keeping a good dynamic range of 9 EVs and a color depth of 18bits.

So I have 30dB SNR and 9EV DR and 18bit color depth at those ISOs. But again, that doesn't really tell me how it translates to the viewing of a photo.


----------



## jrista (Sep 15, 2016)

*Welcome, Canon, to the year 2012!!* ;D

Well, they may be four years late, but it looks like they have finally caught up to the rest of the pack. It looks like the D810 still has the edge with their ISO 64, however when you bump the D810 up to ISO 100 on DPR's comparison tool, it's a pretty level playing field...D810 still has an edge, but it's color is off:







I also prefer the more neutral blacks of the 5D IV, 1DX II and D5500 over the reddish hue of the D810. Good to finally be seeing Canon's DR up to modern standards. The 5D IV looks better to my eyes than even the 1DX II.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Sep 15, 2016)

Last week I put together a speculative chart (http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=30675.msg619797#msg619797) based on the beta images from DPR. 

I think the DXO measures line up pretty well, so I'm comfortable with saying that the 5D-IV has delivered on my expectations in terms of image quality.

This too is ignoring the potential extra highlight recovery from dual-pixel-RAW, which is discussed on RAWgigger: http://www.rawdigger.com/howtouse/canon-dual-pixel-mode-highlights-are-there

I'd guess there is at least an extra 0.5Ev available in extreme highlights when shooting dpRAW and it might just be a software upgrade away...


----------



## StudentOfLight (Sep 15, 2016)

jrista said:


> *Welcome, Canon, to the year 2012!!* ;D
> 
> Well, they may be four years late, but it looks like they have finally caught up to the rest of the pack. It looks like the D810 still has the edge with their ISO 64, however when you bump the D810 up to ISO 100 on DPR's comparison tool, it's a pretty level playing field...D810 still has an edge, but it's color is off:
> 
> ...


I'm very happy with the color performance. So happy Canon fixed the red channel. I look forward to seeing astro images from the 5D-IV.


----------



## willhuff.net (Sep 15, 2016)

What a weird place for the 5DS to be in. It was designed to be the top image quality camera for landscapes and studio work, but now the mk4 has better dynamic range. I wanted to get the 5DS but the sensor wasn't much improved from the 5Dmk3 so I held off. Now I have to decide if 20mpx or more dynamic range is more important. I wonder how long it will take for the 5DSmk2 to come out.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 15, 2016)

dilbert said:


> willhuff.net said:
> 
> 
> > What a weird place for the 5DS to be in. It was designed to be the top image quality camera for landscapes and studio work, but now the mk4 has better dynamic range. I wanted to get the 5DS but the sensor wasn't much improved from the 5Dmk3 so I held off. Now I have to decide if 20mpx or more dynamic range is more important. I wonder how long it will take for the 5DSmk2 to come out.
> ...



I don't think it's a weird place. If you want uber high resolution, you have the S/R. If you want more flexibility with your files (arguably more important in the low light/fast shutter scenarios), you go 5D4.

Gentleman's bet there will be no new 5DS/R in 2017? They will almost undoubtedly update it eventually, but next year? I think you're dreaming.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> Gentleman's bet there will be no new 5DS/R in 2017? They will almost undoubtedly update it eventually, but next year? I think you're dreaming.



Agree. There's as much a chance for a 5DS2 in 2017 as there is for a 7D3 in 2017. (Which is to say: no chance at all)

Next year is (all but certainly) a 6D2 in the front half of the year and then a 'who knows' window in the schedule where Canon will innovate or refresh in unlikely ways: an SL2, a dedicated astro rig, a fixed lens FF mirrorless rig, perhaps a 50 MP 1D rig a la the 1Ds3, etc.

I just don't see them violating their long 4+ year routine with 5D bodies, and certainly not just to chase one stop of base ISO DR over the current model (the 5DS sits somewhere between the 5D3 and 5D4 on DR if I recall). The 5D4 would have to have unleashed some face-melting game changer of a sensor to warrant a 'trickle-down tech refresh' after only two years. I just don't see it happening.

- A


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 15, 2016)

dilbert said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



So it's a bet!


----------



## jrista (Sep 15, 2016)

willhuff.net said:


> What a weird place for the 5DS to be in. It was designed to be the top image quality camera for landscapes and studio work, but now the mk4 has better dynamic range. I wanted to get the 5DS but the sensor wasn't much improved from the 5Dmk3 so I held off. Now I have to decide if 20mpx or more dynamic range is more important. I wonder how long it will take for the 5DSmk2 to come out.



If you are controlling your light source, such as studio or portrait photography, then the 5Ds is still probably king. All that resolution, you could downsample by 20mp and average out the noise, and recover some DR if you really needed to. But I think the more important thing with that camera is the stellar resolution for controlled lighting scenes.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2016)

dilbert said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



I think they do have predictable schedules, actually:

http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_rumours.html#canon_age_chart

The 1DX (recently) and 5D# line (throughout) has a 4-4.5 year refresh. All money would also be on a 4 year 6D refresh cycle, as it's now a cascade of 1DX# --> 5D# --> 6D# in roughly six month chunks just like the last time (with the 1DX --> 5D3 --> 6D). 

I see the 5DS# probably following suit with the 5D# and going every four, but Nikon seems to be at 36 MP and isn't pushing Canon to climb higher just yet. Perhaps it's a longer refresh cycle for that. We'll see.

The 7D line had one 5 year refresh with a mid-cycle firmware/functionality upgrade, and they are _doing just that again_ with the 7D2. I peg that as a 5 year cycle product.

The XXD line is the somewhat inconsistent animal, but 3 years seems about right.

- A


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 15, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...



Nope!

Because I still give a s*** on DXO scores. 
I am glad to see that Canon does improve their sensor tech and that even DXO recognizes it 
But I can sleep quite well because real live differences don't justify that price explosion of 27% MRSP in Germany.
I can calmly wait for even better sensors or better lenses. 
Canon won't see my money for a new body too soon.


----------



## Aglet (Sep 15, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > *Welcome, Canon, to the year 2012!!* ;D
> ...


the noise in those pushed dark areas still looks a bit vertical-bandy in the 5d4 but not nearly as much as the older tech bodies.
Still happier with my ABC bodies and non-Canon glass for the stuff I shoot but glad the big C gang finally has another seriously improved imaging machine out there.


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2016)

dilbert said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...



There are exceptions, sure, but don't miss the bigger picture. Canon lets pricier products stay on the market for a number of years to maximize profits. Natural disasters and slight reshuffling of the schedule due to other releases are going to happen that alter the timing a bit. It's not precise like a train schedule -- it's just a rough timing rule of thumb.

I also see them hitting a 'cross-brand rhythm' in which the FF product lines work a roughly 4 year schedule and each get their 6 months in the spotlight (leaks / announcement / marketing push / pre-orders / initial orders ship / reviews, etc.) for the 1DX, 5D and 6D lines. Obviously, three rigs X 6 months = only 18 months of a 4 year cycle, so yes, there is room for other releases. Those gaps in the calendar are when we get the fairly unpredictable updates (XXD), altogether new product lines (5DS, EOS M), major L lens releases, video products, and odd flavors of Canon innovation:


SL1
XC10
The first EOS M before it became a steady line
Astro cameras

...and it ends up being a pretty busy 4 years. I am not setting a clock on that 4 years, but you get the idea.

Could they expedite the 5DS to drop it in behind the 6D release in the FF train of annoucements? It's certainly possible, but it seems both out of the ordinary for Canon to do with a FF line and it seems like Canon isn't (yet) being pressured in the ultra high resolution space. Nikon _could_ drop a 50MP+ rig with a better sensor and push Canon to change their plans with the 5DS2, but my money's on Canon being Canon and sticking to their plan.

- A


----------



## Act444 (Sep 15, 2016)

scyrene said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > ahsanford said:
> ...



Yeah, I'm beginning to sense that as well. A major breakthrough will be necessary apparently. Still, 1 stop may be workable. Curious to see the direction they take the next 6D - maybe that camera becomes the low-light master, staying in the ~22-24MP range?


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2016)

Act444 said:


> Yeah, I'm beginning to sense that as well. A major breakthrough will be necessary apparently. Still, 1 stop may be workable. Curious to see the direction they take the next 6D - maybe that camera becomes the low-light master, staying in the ~22-24MP range?



Canon is not set up like Sony with a7S line being the lowest res + best for video + best low light. The 6D is supposed to be a consumer focused / affordable FF option a la the Nikon D610. It's not supposed to be the best at _anything_ (other than FF value).

So I see the 6D outperforming the 5D3 sensor as a bit of a one-off that Canon will not repeat; people who sunk $3499 into a 5D3 were decidedly non-plused to see a 6D at $2099 (at launch) with a slightly better sensor and -3 EV center AF. So Canon needs the 5D4 and 5DS to completely outclass the the 6D2. Or if the 6D2 ends up anywhere near the 5D4 for sensor performance, Canon will punish the product elsewhere to protect 5D sales -- likely by nerfing key features on the 6D2 to dissuade those with 5D4 money from buying a 6D2 instead.

The betting man would expect a flip screen + DPAF with the 6D2, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Canon limit the 6D2 with a 1/4000 max shutter, no 4K, fewer AF points than the 5D line, lower burst rate, lock it out from having anti-flicker or Dual-Pixel RAW, etc.

- A


----------



## Jack Douglas (Sep 15, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > Yeah, I'm beginning to sense that as well. A major breakthrough will be necessary apparently. Still, 1 stop may be workable. Curious to see the direction they take the next 6D - maybe that camera becomes the low-light master, staying in the ~22-24MP range?
> ...



When all the 6D bashing was going on I bought it because it seemed better value for a camera that would get upgraded to ....... looks like the 5D4 over the 1DX II given I'm not that committed to doing video and essentially no sports. 

The 6D delivered close to 1DX IQ based on my friend and I shooting together. I knew nothing compared to now and so this feels really good because I feel much more confident in making this upgrade. 

Provided these early reports continue to be positive, I'm committed to waiting until spring hoping for a price drop and then it'll be 5D4. Couple this with my 400 DO II purchase and I'm almost giddy.

Only negative has been the few weeks of enduring all the Canon bashing by whiners. 

Jack


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 15, 2016)

Jack Douglas said:


> When all the 6D bashing was going on I bought it because it seemed better value for a camera that would get upgraded to ....... looks like the 5D4 over the 1DX II given I'm not that committed to doing video and essentially no sports.



Ah, that's the key distinction, though. With stills, the 1DX did a jillion things the 6D could not (burst, AF, metering, tracking, high ISO, etc.). But for a stills-only shooter, one could argue that other than AF (in fairness, a really big deal), having a 1/8000 shutter and +1.5 fps, a 5D3 was not that much better than a 6D, certainly not to the level a $3499 vs. $2099 rig ought to have been. 

Further, the 5d line was the cheapest 'step-up-to a new FF rig' option available to crop shooters before the 6D came out, so some crop-upgrading stills-only folks in 2012 had painful buyers' remorse that they had to purchase an overkill $3499 professional rig (with video features they'd never use) to get tickets to the FF party and then ostensibly have the camera _they probably would have purchased instead_ -- a solid starter FF rig -- show up a good 8 months later.

That's why 1DX people didn't give a damn about the 6D, while the 5D3 people were saying "Hey, wait a minute!" once it was announced, once reviews started rolling in, etc. The 6D is not better than the 5D3 on aggregate (at all), but if you don't shoot video or high fps / servo AF work, it's a far more compelling value.

- A


----------



## PhotoCat (Sep 15, 2016)

Where have you been Canon for the past 6+ years? Glad to see you again! Yay!
Thumbs up on the new Canon sensors!


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 15, 2016)

PhotoCat said:


> Where have you been Canon for the past 6+ years?



Developing, producing, and selling product.


----------



## ejenner (Sep 16, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...


Exactly what I was thinking - about myself.

Looks like my 5DIII just turned into a POS . I'm happy with it and 1/2 stop DR wouldn't have swayed me, but I know what will happen now. I will spend 18 months trying to convince myself I don't need it to finally break down and buy it when I could have been using it for all that time. Sort of did that with the 5DII, then the 5DIII came out and did the same.

Maybe this time will be different. 5DIII IQ is good really, as is the AF which was my biggest issue with the 5DII.

But... if DR and high ISO is really that much better........

Bollocks, here we go again. :'(


----------



## jrista (Sep 16, 2016)

ejenner said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...
> ...



You might be better off waiting anyway. The current price is, IMHO, ridiculous. I purchased my 5D III a couple years after it's initial release for $2650. The price will hold until the initial furor about it fades, then it will start dropping. By 18 months, you should be able to find it for more reasonable prices. 

I am quite happy Canon finally got into the DR game, a little sad that it looks like their time horizons for each new product release get larger and larger (we went from ~3 years between releases to 4.5-5 years between releases...), while the competitions time horizons have shrunk amidst the competitive environment. So, by the time Canon releases a 5D V, we might very well be looking at 16-bit cameras with 15 stops of DR from Sony, Nikon, etc.

In the higher end sensor space, read noise levels have dropped to around 1-1.5e-, in a few cases less, with forecasts for 0.75e- down to 0.5e- read noise on the horizon. These read noise levels are paired with 30ke- to 45ke- full well capacities. That is around 15 stops of DR now, with the possibility of 15.9 stops in the future with sub-electron read noise levels. I don't expect to see such sensors in consumer grade DSLRs for a while, but they are finding their way into other kinds of devices, including the kind of scientific cameras we use for astrophotography. 

At Canon's telescoping snails pace, it will be 2021, maybe 2022 before we see the 5D V. Big question is...will it still have 13.6 stops of DR, will it still have some banding, will their cameras still exhibit amp glow, etc...?


----------



## ahsanford (Sep 16, 2016)

jrista said:


> You might be better off waiting anyway. The current price is, IMHO, ridiculous. I purchased my 5D III a couple years after it's initial release for $2650. The price will hold until the initial furor about it fades, then it will start dropping. By 18 months, you should be able to find it for more reasonable prices.



Good advice, but don't hold your breath on that. See the price plot over time below-- the 5D3 has somewhat legendarily held its price when compared against other Canon models. Further, those little low dips in price were folks at B&H and Adorama playing games and violating minimum pricing, which Canon famously cracked down on a few years ago.

Don't get me wrong -- the price will go down, but not as precipitously as the 6D or other more consumer-oriented models.

- A


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 16, 2016)

ejenner said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...
> ...


If this is what you really think then go to your pc and take a look at your most beloved photos you shot with it.
Of course a new tool is more sexy than the old one and GAS might be tempting. 
But then return to reality and think to yourself that 0,5 ev in comparison is not even 5% improvement coming from about 13 ev. Will this change your world of photography? NO!

And now go out taking excellent pictures with your excellent (old) tool


----------



## Alex_M (Sep 16, 2016)

Question for lucky Canon 5D mark IV owners that own Sekonic 758 or 478 Light Meter as well:

have you had a chance to create your Sekonic Light Meter 5D mark IV custom camera profile?

all this talk about 13EV DR is great but I am very interested to know what Sekonic DTS software consider the camera dynamic range really is?

hint : my Canon 6D was messured to have 6.5EV DR (10 to 250 RGB) and 5.3EV of shadows clipping point to highlights clipping point range. (-2.3EV from shadows clipping point to mid grey and +3.0EV mid grey to higlihts clipping point, thats from 20 to 245 RGB)


----------



## jrista (Sep 16, 2016)

Alex_M said:


> Question for lucky Canon 5D mark IV owners that own Sekonic 758 or 478 Light Meter as well:
> 
> have you had a chance to create your Sekonic Light Meter 5D mark IV custom camera profile?
> 
> ...



Are you sure that was DR and not SNR? 

Plus, however you are measuring, your measuring in 8-bit, which would cap the maximum measurable DR to 8 stops, whereas the camera is 14-bit, which would allow up to 14 stops of DR. Additionally, the 13.6 stops of DR is on a normalized scale...at native size, it would be less. (Although certainly not 6.5 stops!0

My guess is you are actually measuring SNR, rather than DR. DR is pretty simple: 20 * log(FWC/RN)


----------



## tron (Sep 18, 2016)

ejenner said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I think a number of 5D3 folks not planning on upgrading _may_ have an uncomfortable morning...
> ...


Resistance is futile ;D


----------



## Act444 (Sep 18, 2016)

Act444 said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > Please post a screen shot of the comparison images that drove you to your conclusions.
> ...



Following up on this post:

The following adjustments are needed to that 5D4 file to bring it up to the sharpness level of the 5D3:

- Turn DLO on (takes a couple seconds), and make sure it's set all the way to 100
- Raise sharpness by 0.5 units

Those two tweaks more or less equalize the 5D4 with the unmodified 5D3 file - after that, it looks pretty good! The 5D4 improvements can be much more clearly seen after these adjustments. The 5DS/R clearly has both beat, as expected.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 18, 2016)

Act444 said:


> Act444 said:
> 
> 
> > privatebydesign said:
> ...



This just illustrates what I always say about comparisons. In post everything off is unrealistic whereas each file processed to an optimum level for that camera is realistic, that is what I need to see because that is what I will be selling people.

If you process 5D MkIV files optimally they hold better detail have more dynamic range and lower noise at any iso than a 5D MkIII file at same sized output. And for me that is also key, I don't care what pixel level image quality is like, I don't sell pixels, I sell 16" x 24"'s etc.

The 5D MkIV files have better dynamic range and less noise at any iso than the 5DS/R's too, but they don't have as much detail (which should be no surprise to anybody apart from maybe Dilbert) as long as the iso is low enough to not eat all that detail.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 19, 2016)

Like I said before, we all have different desires, expectations, etc. 

My general point still stands though: from where I sit (not anyone else!), the 5D4 files need additional work to look optimal than the 5D3 files do (longer workflow, reminds me of my 7D), due to what appears to be a stronger AA filter. But, ultimately at the end of the day, a better result can be achieved due to the higher MP count and expanded editing latitude. Just depends on the end goal, that's all. 

And at higher ISOs, I've noticed DLO just adds undesirable artifacts - to both camera files. Works well for lower ISO settings though (best at 800 or lower). Dialing back the default NR on the 5D4 files I find to be a virtual necessity as for some reason DPP is heavy-handed at the default setting. Oddly enough, I find the 5D3 files contain enough detail to not need to mess with the default NR settings unless above 6400 (which is rare since I cap auto ISO at 6400 anyway). 

All that said, I'm beginning to warm up to it a bit more, still not worth the asking price though. Maybe I'll consider when the price comes down or there's a rebate. 

What would be awesome is if you can set auto ISO in 1/3 stop increments instead of the normal full stop. Like, maybe setting the cap at 8,000 if that squeaks by?


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 19, 2016)

Act444 said:


> What would be awesome is if you can set auto ISO in 1/3 stop increments instead of the normal full stop. Like, maybe setting the cap at 8,000 if that squeaks by?



It does.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 19, 2016)

Act444 said:


> Like I said before, we all have different desires, expectations, etc.
> 
> My general point still stands though: from where I sit (not anyone else!), the 5D4 files need additional work to look optimal than the 5D3 files do (longer workflow, reminds me of my 7D).........



No it doesn't. My point is every single digital image you have ever looked at has been processed. Yu are saying it will take more time to process 5D MkIV files, I say it won't. Don't you use custom import settings?

When you get a new camera you have a play with it and work out basic required processing, I make custom dual illuminate camera profiles and optimize a capture sharpening setting, I also always switch lens corrections and remove CA as a starting point. I then create an Import Preference and apply that on import to every file that is taken by that camera. This is part of my familiarity process and takes no additional time, but if you want to I'll do it for you in 1 hour and charge you $30 for the Import Preset that includes custom camera profile. 

5D MkIV, or any other camera, then takes no additional time to process, all images start at an optimized position and none of it is destructive. For instance when I move an image to PS I turn off any LR sharpening as I find for specific output purposes PS can do a better job, or in LR I might turn lens corrections off if I wan the natural lens vignette and I haven't cropped off center.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 19, 2016)

I use DPP to process images, not Lightroom or Photoshop. I typically only use the most basic of editing functions and have found that for what I do, DPP is good enough for 99% of my PP needs, and no need to spend hundreds on Adobe software. I have tested alternative workflows such as DXO Optics Pro and overall I prefer DPP color rendition, processing speed, etc. although DXO wins on noise handling. 

I'm currently exploring ways to fix certain default settings to images taken with a particular camera (or ISO setting, or certain lens), but haven't figured it out yet. The closest I get is saving a custom "recipe" to apply to a group of photos, which works well or photos taken in similar environments. If any DPP users know any tricks, please share!

That page in the manual, if I'm not mistaken, is for setting ISO on a general scale (the 5D3 has that tidbit as well). However, it does not seem to refer to being able to set AUTO ISO to that level of precision - but if someone who has a 5D4 can test this out, I'd greatly appreciate it


----------



## AlanF (Sep 19, 2016)

I have shot only a few images now and am still a tyro for DPP but have found some primitive settings for easy use. I set the 5DIV for "fine" picture style for jpegs, which I have been taking in parallel with RAW. I have default for the RAW conversion of 4 strength, 1 fineness and 1 for threshold for sharpening and 4 for each of noise reduction, which work well for my usual iso range of 640-1250 and give better sharpness than the in-camera conversion to jpegs.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 19, 2016)

Act444 said:


> I use DPP to process images, not Lightroom or Photoshop. I typically only use the most basic of editing functions and have found that for what I do, DPP is good enough for 99% of my PP needs, and no need to spend hundreds on Adobe software. I have tested alternative workflows such as DXO Optics Pro and overall I prefer DPP color rendition, processing speed, etc. although DXO wins on noise handling.
> 
> I'm currently exploring ways to fix certain default settings to images taken with a particular camera (or ISO setting, or certain lens), but haven't figured it out yet. The closest I get is saving a custom "recipe" to apply to a group of photos, which works well or photos taken in similar environments. If any DPP users know any tricks, please share!
> 
> That page in the manual, if I'm not mistaken, is for setting ISO on a general scale (the 5D3 has that tidbit as well). However, it does not seem to refer to being able to set AUTO ISO to that level of precision - but if someone who has a 5D4 can test this out, I'd greatly appreciate it



You can do the same thing in DPP. Just create a custom Picture Style, done via the free software, then either use that in camera, yep you can load it to your camera and or DPP. 

Or make a custom 'Recipe' and apply as a batch, but custom Picture Styles are faster IMO.

Read the box. It says_ "ISO speed will be automatically set in 1/3-stop increments when ISO-Auto is set."_


----------



## sebasan (Sep 20, 2016)

I don't like what i am seeing here (really i like it because the difference with the 5DIII is minimal).
Maybe I am watching something wrong and I don't know if this method is better than DxO

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV


----------



## jrista (Sep 20, 2016)

sebasan said:


> I don't like what i am seeing here (really i like it because the difference with the 5DIII is minimal).
> I don't know if this method is better than DxO.
> 
> http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Canon%20EOS%205D%20Mark%20IV



Those charts are based on the authors PDR, or Photographic Dynamic Range. To understand the differences relative to engineering DR (a more standard method), read this:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/GeneralTopics/Sensors_&_Raw/Sensor_Analysis_Primer/Engineering_and_Photographic_Dynamic_Range.htm


----------



## mackguyver (Sep 20, 2016)

I guess it's time to sell all my bodies and ditch my HDR software


----------



## sebasan (Sep 20, 2016)

jrista said:


> sebasan said:
> 
> 
> > I don't like what i am seeing here (really i like it because the difference with the 5DIII is minimal).
> ...



Yes, and the difference beetween sensors is aprox the same that DxO.
The 5DIV (in my opinion) still is the best all-rounder camera, having in count that the A7RII sensor is slighty better but is far behind in autofocus performance.


----------



## jrista (Sep 20, 2016)

sebasan said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > sebasan said:
> ...



I don't think the A7 series is far behind. I think it's on par, just like Canon is on par with Nikon. I think the main thing is, the Sony AF system works differently, so you can't use it the same way as you use the Canon AF system. Once you learn how the Sony system works, it is just as effective.


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 20, 2016)

jrista said:


> sebasan said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



I'd say it depends on what you're doing. In the studio environment, I often find the sony more effective than my canon (5D3, mind you, I don't own the 5D4 and haven't used my 1Dx). The eyeAF is like black magic... when it works. But it also has a strong propensity to hunt.

When shooting long lenses, the canon is significantly better. If and when sony comes up with long native e-mount glass, it may close the gap somewhat, but the bodies may not have the power to drive heavy elements as effectively as canon SLRs. Perhaps they should offer up a battery compartment on superteles (not joking).


----------



## sebasan (Sep 20, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > sebasan said:
> ...



Yes, I was thinking in a most demanding scene with a telephoto and a fast subject.


----------



## jrista (Sep 20, 2016)

sebasan said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...



I don't think that changes anything. Again, different systems, they operate differently. That doesn't mean one is less capable than the other. Even with an adapted lens from a different brand, Sony's newest AF systems are still capable of tracking fast objects like BIF. You just have to use the system properly. I see so many people fighting against the system, trying to force it to work the way they want it to, rather than working with it the way it was designed. That doesn't just go for Canon fans using a Sony for the first time, it goes for Sony fans using a Canon, or Nikon fans using a Sony, etc. If you fight against the design of the system, of course it's going to bomb. However if you learn how it works and work with it's design, whole different story.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 20, 2016)

jrista said:


> I don't think that changes anything. Again, different systems, they operate differently. That doesn't mean one is less capable than the other. Even with an adapted lens from a different brand, Sony's newest AF systems are still capable of tracking fast objects like BIF. You just have to use the system properly. I see so many people fighting against the system, trying to force it to work the way they want it to, rather than working with it the way it was designed. That doesn't just go for Canon fans using a Sony for the first time, it goes for Sony fans using a Canon, or Nikon fans using a Sony, etc. If you fight against the design of the system, of course it's going to bomb. However if you learn how it works and work with it's design, whole different story.


YES!

This is why a "standard test" for AF is a bad idea. Different systems work differently....


----------



## 3kramd5 (Sep 21, 2016)

Don Haines said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think that changes anything. Again, different systems, they operate differently. That doesn't mean one is less capable than the other. Even with an adapted lens from a different brand, Sony's newest AF systems are still capable of tracking fast objects like BIF. You just have to use the system properly. I see so many people fighting against the system, trying to force it to work the way they want it to, rather than working with it the way it was designed. That doesn't just go for Canon fans using a Sony for the first time, it goes for Sony fans using a Canon, or Nikon fans using a Sony, etc. If you fight against the design of the system, of course it's going to bomb. However if you learn how it works and work with it's design, whole different story.
> ...



+1


----------



## jrista (Sep 21, 2016)

Don Haines said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think that changes anything. Again, different systems, they operate differently. That doesn't mean one is less capable than the other. Even with an adapted lens from a different brand, Sony's newest AF systems are still capable of tracking fast objects like BIF. You just have to use the system properly. I see so many people fighting against the system, trying to force it to work the way they want it to, rather than working with it the way it was designed. That doesn't just go for Canon fans using a Sony for the first time, it goes for Sony fans using a Canon, or Nikon fans using a Sony, etc. If you fight against the design of the system, of course it's going to bomb. However if you learn how it works and work with it's design, whole different story.
> ...



Ding! Ding! 

Although...did someone actually try to come up with a standardized test for AF?


----------



## StudentOfLight (Sep 21, 2016)

jrista said:


> Don Haines said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...


I'd use a tunnel of horrors:
- low light, 
- needing quick focus 
- on quick moving (jump-scare-type) objects


----------



## jrista (Sep 21, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > Don Haines said:
> ...



Not even Canon does "well" in such a scenario...even with a huge 600mm f/4 lens. Every camera's AF system is going to suffer miserably in that situation. 

But that isn't really what I think Don means by a standardized AF test.


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 23, 2016)

It is not related to this subject. DXO is very generous in giving their older versions of dxo optics pro for free. You can get dxo optics pro 9.5 for free. Nice alternative if you are stuck with DPP.


----------



## KeithBreazeal (Sep 24, 2016)

The 5D Mark IV tracking works a bit differently that the previous bodies in that the RGB metering system can recognize objects and works with the AF to help track that subject. The 5D mark IV and the 1D X II are in a class of their own in the AF category. My first shoot was at the Reno Air Races and I could see the difference from previous years of shooting the same thing under the same conditions.


----------



## Sporgon (Sep 24, 2016)

If the DXO scores were based on native resolution rather than reducing to 8 mp the 5D IV would score much higher. Probably one of the highest in fact.


----------



## jrista (Sep 24, 2016)

KeithBreazeal said:


> The 5D Mark IV tracking works a bit differently that the previous bodies in that the RGB metering system can recognize objects and works with the AF to help track that subject. The 5D mark IV and the 1D X II are in a class of their own in the AF category. My first shoot was at the Reno Air Races and I could see the difference from previous years of shooting the same thing under the same conditions.



Nikon's AF system has been doing the same for over a decade... I'd say that means the 5D IV and 1D X II just join all the Nikon bodies with 3D full color subject recognition and tracking that originally created that class... Canon's iTR is excellent, don't get me wrong, but it definitely isn't something brand new that Canon pioneered...Nikon was ahead of them (I also don't believe that Canon's AF system uses subject distance information the same way Nikon's does...)


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 25, 2016)

jrista said:


> KeithBreazeal said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D Mark IV tracking works a bit differently that the previous bodies in that the RGB metering system can recognize objects and works with the AF to help track that subject. The 5D mark IV and the 1D X II are in a class of their own in the AF category. My first shoot was at the Reno Air Races and I could see the difference from previous years of shooting the same thing under the same conditions.
> ...


I thought Canon is the first one to do this iTR tracking with 1DX. Nikon continue adding these feature to lot of bodies. Canon somehow doesn't add it lower end models.


----------



## jrista (Sep 26, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> jrista said:
> 
> 
> > KeithBreazeal said:
> ...



Nikon was using an RGB metering sensor and subject recognition a very long time ago. They had their SRS, or Scene Recognition System, as far back as 2007 at least, nearly a decade ago. I actually believe it was employed before then, but I cannot find references at the moment. The 1D X did not hit until 2012. 

EDIT: 

It looks like it was in 2007 when Nikon first started using RGB metering and SRS with their AF systems:

http://www.nikon.com/news/2007/0823_08.htm


----------



## ritholtz (Sep 27, 2016)

jrista said:


> ritholtz said:
> 
> 
> > jrista said:
> ...


Thanks Jrista. 1DX is the first camera body with iTR. Then they went cold on this feature until 7d2. Nikon is pushing this functionality aggressively into lower end models. Canon skipped this in 80d.


----------



## raptor3x (Sep 27, 2016)

jrista said:


> Nikon's AF system has been doing the same for over a decade... I'd say that means the 5D IV and 1D X II just join all the Nikon bodies with 3D full color subject recognition and tracking that originally created that class... Canon's iTR is excellent, don't get me wrong, but it definitely isn't something brand new that Canon pioneered...Nikon was ahead of them (*I also don't believe that Canon's AF system uses subject distance information the same way Nikon's does*...)



One of the biggest criticisms of Canon's iTR tracking since it was released on the 1DX has been that it relies *too much* on distance information whereas the Nikon system seems to lean on that to a much lesser degree in 3D tracking mode.


----------



## jrista (Sep 27, 2016)

ritholtz said:


> Thanks Jrista. 1DX is the first camera body with iTR. Then they went cold on this feature until 7d2. Nikon is pushing this functionality aggressively into lower end models. Canon skipped this in 80d.



Sure. My point is, iTR is not something newfangled and innovative...Nikon had the same technology years before Canon implemented it into the 1D X. The 1D X was just the first time that Canon ever employed something similar, where full scene information from a color metering sensor was used to help the AF system.


----------

