# Some EOS 5D Mark IV Information [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jul 12, 2015)

```
A report over at Northlight mentions testing of the EOS 5D Mark IV.</p>
<blockquote><p>There is still a mix between 18 and 24MP. 24MP is the likely final outcome, with the lower MP sensor testing AF speed and buffer management issues (less than 8FPS is the likely shooting speed).</p></blockquote>
<p>We’ve heard recently that the camera is coming in 2016, with shipping of the C300 Mark II and EOS-1D X Mark II to happen before the EOS 5D Mark IV. There’s a lot of R&D dollars going into the 5D4 project, with the hopes of launching a product that is perceived to be a big jump in features and performance over the more-than-capable EOS 5D Mark III.</p>
```


----------



## PureClassA (Jul 12, 2015)

Agree 100% with Keith's assessment and what Ive been saying all along. Everyone getting all bent out of shape over this 18MP sensor rumor, when all it is there for right now is to test other parts of the camera. Canon hasn't made the FF version of 24MP sensor from the t6 yet, and we can bet we'll see it in the 5D4. The real question is do we see DPAF in this one and will it use the sensor tech from the C300 II with the 15syops of DR everyone has been waiting for


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 12, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> A report over at Northlight mentions testing of the EOS 5D Mark IV.</p>
> <blockquote><p>There is still a mix between 18 and 24MP. 24MP is the likely final outcome, with the lower MP sensor testing AF speed and buffer management issues (less than 8FPS is the likely shooting speed).</p></blockquote>
> <p>We’ve heard recently that the camera is coming in 2016, with shipping of the C300 Mark II and EOS-1D X Mark II to happen before the EOS 5D Mark IV. There’s a lot of R&D dollars going into the 5D4 project, with the hopes of launching a product that is perceived to be a big jump in features and performance over the more-than-capable EOS 5D Mark III.</p>



We did not expect the 5D4 to be a high resolution monster, but again only a very modest bump in MP would have us expecting something else on the body to be much much better. 

I've passed on the 5DS rigs in favor of what I hope will be a better high ISO rig in the 5D4. I don't shoot video, I don't need 8-10 fps, but I'll always welcome:


Wider AF spread, more AF points, more AF options, etc. -- I'm hopeful this is going to happen as the 1DX II will apparently beat it to market and the 5D3 has the 1DX's basic system. Perhaps the 5D4 will clone the 1DX II's system in a similar way?
Better high ISO performance
A better / slicker / easier form of AFMA -- perhaps something realtime interactive with an external monitor, or something that auto-shoots 20 shots at each AFMA interval (like for printer calibration) and you just choose the best one.
Wireless flash master on-board (not expecting this, but hey, it'd be nice)
The option to change out to manual focusing screens
Spot metering at any AF point (at this point, I'm just repeating myself so Canon will notice.)
The viewfinder improvements we've seen with the 7D2 and 5DS bodies.

But I have a feeling the offering of the 5DS rigs was what (as a stills shooter) I was supposed to get, and that the 5D4 will be overwhelmingly video focused. In other words, now that the 5DS is out, the door is open for the 5D4 to be more specialized for video. I don't want to pony up $3.5k+ for a video rig that also takes decent stills. 

- A


----------



## bvukich (Jul 12, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Spot metering at any AF point (at this point, I'm just repeating myself so Canon will notice.)



It may sound trivial, but this is the one feature that will probably decide between a 5d4 and 1dx2 for me.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 12, 2015)

bvukich said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Spot metering at any AF point (at this point, I'm just repeating myself so Canon will notice.)
> ...



It's _not_ trivial, and that's exactly why they do it. If you're on the fence over this feature and you have the 1DX kind of money to spend on a rig, they've got you. 

Apparently, you can enable this on your 5D3 (and a few other bodies) with Magic Lantern, but I've been leery of brickification of my primary rig.

- A


----------



## PureClassA (Jul 12, 2015)

Expect the 5D4 to have the same AF as the 7D2. 65 points spread across the frame. The 1DX2 will have a new system all to itself


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 12, 2015)

PureClassA said:


> Expect the 5D4 to have the same AF as the 7D2. 65 points spread across the frame. The 1DX2 will have a new system all to itself



Given the FOV differences, I don't believe Canon clones AF systems from crop to FF or vice versa. 

For instance, the 5DS rigs _didn't_ get the latest/greatest 7D2 AF setup -- they got the 5D3 setup. I'm expecting the 1DX II to offer something newer / better, and *eventually* (perhaps not with the 5D4) it will trickle down to the other FF rigs. As I'm possibly in a buying cycle in a year or two, I'm hoping the 5D4 does indeed get the good stuff this time around.

- A


----------



## CinemaDP (Jul 12, 2015)

I shoot for network TV and we have a 4K pilot for TBS and need a small camera to the main cameras. I have been using a Canon 5d mark 3 and prior to that a Canon 5d Mark 2. My footage is being used by all networks and aired all over the world in reruns and prime time. I am waiting for the Canon 5d Mark iv but at this point I am going with the Sony A7rII because they are delivering August 10 2015. Why does Canon drop the ball on the Canon 5D Mark 4 can only be they don't want to compete with their own C cameras. I am not spending $15,000. on a C300 mark 2 for a crash camera and the MX10 is to low quality of a sensor.

Sony has the F5 and F55 and they are releasing in a viable crash camera in a month. Canon if you are looking please wake up. You created the industry with the 5D Mark 2 but now are slow, scared and losing me to Sony who I hate for their lack of customer services and support.


----------



## Travler (Jul 12, 2015)

There was a rumor on another sight that said the Mark IV would have the same new focus system as the 1DX II. It is to cover more area more cross type and the red highlight to come back. I hope this is all true. Was thinking about the 5DS/R but really don't need that many MP. I will wait to see how this one plays out.


----------



## candyman (Jul 12, 2015)

All good and well...but please (and I am repeating myself : ) give us EC in Manual Mode when using auto ISO. Preferable with firmware update in 5D MK3


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 12, 2015)

If curious, here is Bryan Carnathan's list of advantages that the 1DX has over the 5D3 today (as a semi-potential wishlist for a 5D4):

Canon EOS 1D X Feature Advantages Over the EOS 5D Mark III

More advanced metering system (100k pixel, 252 zone RGB vs 63 zone iFCL)
EOS iTR AF (Intelligent Tracking and Recognition AF including facial recognition)
Frame rate is 2x faster (12 fps vs. 6 fps)
Higher frame burst rating (RAW: 38 vs. 18 rated / 54 vs. 33 tested)
AF point-linked spot metering and Multi-spot metering
Faster AF driven by more powerful battery pack (with select Canon L lenses)
EV 0-20 Metering range (vs. EV 1-20)
 Higher native ISO settings available (51200 vs. 25600)
Higher expanded ISO settings available (204800 vs. 102400)
Less high ISO noise
 Faster X-sync speed (1/250 vs. 1/200)
Dual DIGIC 5+ processors plus DIGIC 4 processor dedicated to AE functions
(5D III has a single DIGIC 5+ processor and a non-specified AF-dedicated processor)
 Higher battery life rating (1,120 vs. 950 shots)
Higher shutter durability rating (400,000 vs. 150,000 cycles)
Higher viewfinder magnification (.76x vs .71x)
Shorter viewfinder blackout time
Viewfinder provides more nose relief from LCD (less nose spots on LCD)
Has a viewfinder shutter
Built-in Ethernet Port
More advanced self-cleaning sensor
 Better Weather Sealing
 Built in vertical grip
 Accepts optional focus screens
7 LCD brightness levels (vs. 3)
More custom functions (31 vs. 13)

I'm not a camera body scholar, but one would think:

Red = Some delta between the brands must exist on these points. They allow the 1D to pull off what it's mission is (let's say crazy high burst/buffer) or support the realities those missions bring about (shutter life, battery life, processing power, etc). I would argue the 1D will always have/need to have something above and beyond the 5D on these metrics, so we shouldn't expect the 5D4 to get 1D level performance there.

Blue = (at least to me) Sillyness for market differentiation only -- no reason Canon can't offer this in a 5D4 other than for protecting the 1D price.

Green = sensor-related and there more a matter of release timing than 1D vs. 5D performance levels. It stands to a reason that (eventually) the 5D line will outperform an aging 1D sensor.

But I'm curious to see what you folks think might be 1D-level features that the 5D4 could reasonably get.

- A


----------



## RGF (Jul 12, 2015)

I am hoping that 5D M4 improves on the current camera in all aspects. A decrease in MP for improvement in ISO is not a trade off I would favorite.

I would like to see 16 MP camera with very good low light response.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 12, 2015)

RGF said:


> I am hoping that 5D M4 improves on the current camera in all aspects. A decrease in MP for improvement in ISO is not a trade off I would favorite.
> 
> I would like to see 16 MP camera with very good low light response.



I'd love such a body, but I am hard pressed to think of an example where a nex-gen of a mature brand _lowered_ its MP. 

If Canon is going to make a low MP / high ISO a7S-like sensor for filming bigfoot under nothing but moonlight, I don't think it will be called a 5D4. They'd surely give it a new name, right?

- A


----------



## Policar (Jul 12, 2015)

I want an AR7RII for landscape and as a b cam for video. But I also want super low light performance. 

And an A7S for low light videography. But I also want to print 11X17 at 300dpi without upscaling.

I also want a legit SLR because I far prefer an optical viewfinder, ideally with great dynamic range. Maybe a D810.

The best in each of those three categories is definitely not a Canon, but if a Canon is 80% of all of those things then I have to buy one camera and not three.

If Canon introduces the C300 MK II's dual ISO thing on this and the low light is competitive with Sony (the 5D Mark III is nowhere close) I'm all in.

Otherwise getting a used A7S or an A7S Mk II.


----------



## rs (Jul 12, 2015)

candyman said:


> All good and well...but please (and I am repeating myself : ) give us EC in Manual Mode when using auto ISO. Preferable with firmware update in 5D MK3


The 7D2 and 5Ds/5DsR got that feature, so the 5D4 is very likely to get it.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 12, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> I'd love such a body, but I am hard pressed to think of an example where a nex-gen of a mature brand _lowered_ its MP.
> 
> If Canon is going to make a low MP / high ISO a7S-like sensor for filming bigfoot under nothing but moonlight, I don't think it will be called a 5D4. They'd surely give it a new name, right?
> 
> - A



Isn't there a rumored 5Dcinema hanging out here?


----------



## rs (Jul 12, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > I'd love such a body, but I am hard pressed to think of an example where a nex-gen of a mature brand _lowered_ its MP.
> ...


Those 5D C specs sounded like a rehash of the 1D C to me. 18MP, 4K, 12fps.


----------



## RGF (Jul 12, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > I am hoping that 5D M4 improves on the current camera in all aspects. A decrease in MP for improvement in ISO is not a trade off I would favorite.
> ...



Could call it 5DU (ultra) or 5DH (high) sensitivity. Extend the 5D line into high MP, high light sensitivity and normal.

Just a thought


----------



## RGF (Jul 12, 2015)

kraats said:


> If the megapixel count is that low on the mkiv I feel like they have to come with native iso 32 or at least iso 64 and much better dynamic range. Actually the dynamic range has to be better then any other dslr on the market.



Improved but not necessarily market leader


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 12, 2015)

kraats said:


> If the megapixel count is that low on the mkiv I feel like they have to come with native iso 32 or at least iso 64 and much better dynamic range. Actually the dynamic range has to be better then any other dslr on the market.



Sure, but who wants industry best low-ISO DR _at a low MP? _ Landscapers want detail, right?

I think if you make a low MP rig, it's principally for high ISO use and for video. The a7S was dead on for that.

- A


----------



## Light_Pilgrim (Jul 12, 2015)

So in this case, is there anything Canon can offer in the next 12-18 months to professional landscape photographers looking for more DR? Anything similar to D810 coming?


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 12, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > I am hoping that 5D M4 improves on the current camera in all aspects. A decrease in MP for improvement in ISO is not a trade off I would favorite.
> ...


With wider aspect ratio screens becoming more popular, I wonder if Canon will offer video in:
21x9 UW-TV 4K (5120x2160) or 
19x10 DCI 4K (4096x2160) instead of 
16x9 UHD 4K (3840x2160) which all the competitors are offering.

In terms of 18MP... 5120x2160 would be a letterbox crop of 17.5MP full frame sensor. The same sensor could also shoot in APS-H crop mode to get UHD 4K as does the 1D-C.

I'd also like to see Quad-HD (2560x1440) as an intermediate resolution for video. if you need to deliver 1080p, then QHD would still allow you some cropping and/or downscaling potential while halving the memory-card requirements of full-4K capture. Does anyone think the 5D-IV will shoot 720p at faster than 60fps?

IMO a hypothetical 18MP sensor (5192x3460) could tick many boxes:
1) Can capture enough detail for excellent quality A3 prints, 
2) Has sufficient sensor resolution for class-leading 4K capture, 
3) Has advantages for high-ISO dynamic range,
4) images require less memory card space 
5) Has potential for excellent buffer performance, 
6) Offers efficiency with less data processing for output (Lower heat buildup maybe?)
7) Improved battery performance (Potentially more shots per charge?)


----------



## WeekendWarrior (Jul 12, 2015)

Canon taking their sweet time.. It looks like they're trying to see how many customers they can lose to Sony this year.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Jul 12, 2015)

For the top display, an eInk would be nice.
Then ist would be much more versatile and can offer different modes. Maybe also a small Histogramm, 200 dpi on this small display are sufficient for that...

The read color display should get 1920x1280 (3:2) at least! The current resolution is sooo 2003.


----------



## drjlo (Jul 12, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> We’ve heard recently that the camera is coming in 2016, with shipping of the C300 Mark II and EOS-1D X Mark II to happen before the EOS 5D Mark IV. There’s a lot of R&D dollars going into the 5D4 project



I am praying that late launch and "a lot of R&D dollars" means something truly fabulous for 5D IV. Otherwise, Canon will look kind of silly launching business-as-usual camera long after the launch of something like Sony A7r II with the 42 MP BSI FF sensor. 

"Fabulous" would include (but not limited to): move away from the ancient 0.50µm fab process, improve the read-noise by moving the off-chip ADC to on-chip, Foveon-like sensor, BSI full frame, etc, etc.


----------



## Ivar (Jul 12, 2015)

C'mon guys, Canon is a great system, there is no need for big departures of what it already has.

Just tweak little bit here and there and in the next year that is all what is needed.


----------



## RobertG. (Jul 12, 2015)

24MP doesn't sound very convincing to me. If the sensor performs like the one in the 5D III, the cam is dead on arrival for me. Why not stick that 42MP Sony sensor into a 5D? It would justify a lot of R&D money. Make it 6FPS, proper AF, AE linked to AF points and all the other little things needed to make it slightly better than the Sony A7rII. Just offer the best sensor with the best AF in a 5D housing with the best weather sealing, dual card slots and longest battery life. I wouldn't mind if they limit the video features to protect their cinema line.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 13, 2015)

Since the 5DIII is the best all-around camera available today, any improvement will just be gravy. Candidly, I doubt if I will even consider an upgrade until a year or two after the 5DIV surfaces.

Honestly, if you own the 5DIII and truly use it, I can't imagine expecting anything other than incremental improvements. 

I am expecting: 

A 1/3 to 1/2 stop improvement in high ISO performance; 
1Dx autofocus;
A small increase in frame rate;
Additional weathersealing;
22-24 mp sensor;
Dual Pixel Autofocus;

Additional gravy would be:
Touch Screen;
4K recording;
Useable WiFi;
On camera flash transmitter.

Don't really give a rat's rear about dynamic range.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 13, 2015)

The 5DsR has been the last of 10+ Canon bodies I ever bought, unless the 5D4 delivers most of these points other manufacturers have already addressed: 4K video, slowmo video, swivel screen, focus peaking, more dynamic range, less noise, internal stabilization, being mirrorless, 36-50 megapixels resolution. Then I might buy 2-3 units, otherwise the money continues to go to Sony, Pentax, Panasonic and Nikon. Canon has the best lens lineup and quality, but in terms of cameras the status is disappointing.


----------



## PureClassA (Jul 13, 2015)

I was throwing that out there semi-sarcastically. Otherwise I don't see where else Canon has to go. There's plenty enough room to make a 7-8FPS 24MP 14-15 stop DR camera with a killer 1DX2 over it with 24-28MP at 12-14FPS and the most obscene AF system ever conceived that will be coveted by sports and journalist shooters the world over just as the 1DX is now.




LetTheRightLensIn said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > The real question is do we see DPAF in this one and will it use the sensor tech from the C300 II with the 15syops of DR everyone has been waiting for
> ...


----------



## KanonKaz (Jul 13, 2015)

As a working photojournalist, I'm mainly interested in two things that my 5D Mark III doesn't have: 

Shoot at a high frame rate. 7-8 FPS is not fast enough for sports and news in my opinion. I was under the impression that this camera would come with at least 10 FPS. PLEASE DON'T MESS THIS UP CANON. 

And....The variable crop sensor at Full, 1.3X and 1.6X. Important to have various lengths when shooting sports, and news as well.

I also have a Canon Mark IV. With the two cameras I do have, I'm close to that range. But each camera is lacking. A new camera combining all those features is optimum. Hopefully they aren't thinking of less than 8 FPS. That would be useless in many aspects of what I do as is my 5D Mark III.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2015)

KanonKaz said:


> As a working photojournalist, I'm mainly interested in two things that my 5D Mark III doesn't have:
> 
> Shoot at a high frame rate. 7-8 FPS is not fast enough for sports and news in my opinion. I was under the impression that this camera would come with at least 10 FPS. PLEASE DON'T MESS THIS UP CANON.
> 
> ...



I see the 5D3 as that stellar 9/10 in most categories professional camera that can take on myriad roles, but it does not hit any one of those metrics out of the park. 

So when the world thinks of Canon 5D brand, covering sports is not on that list. I would _not_ expect 10 FPS with the 5D4, not at all. You can shoot sports with it, but YMMV with that (relatively) limited buffer and burst rate.

10+ fps cameras have been relegated to the non-studio 1D and 1DX lines and now the 7D2 as it is clearly a tool for birding and wildlife. Canon _could_ turn 10+ fps on with the 5D4, but at an expected $3500-4000 price point, I think that would undercut 1DX (and 1DX II) sales. 

There are a few things that define the 1DX line today, and I don't see the 5D line ever having them:

10+ fps
Integral grip
Dedicated metering processor
Linked metering to selected AF point (<---- I really want this on the 5D4)
Something about the battery power giving an AF speed boost with certain lenses (someone straighten me out, I'm fuzzy on this one)

I just feel that Canon putting some of these 'top of Mt. Olympus' sort of features on a 5D would make it very hard to get $6-8k for a 1DX II someday. My guess is that we'll see a clear fps bump with the 5D4 over the 5DS, perhaps at 7-8 fps. No more.

- A


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jul 13, 2015)

KanonKaz said:


> As a working photojournalist, I'm mainly interested in two things that my 5D Mark III doesn't have:
> 
> Shoot at a high frame rate. 7-8 FPS is not fast enough for sports and news in my opinion. I was under the impression that this camera would come with at least 10 FPS. PLEASE DON'T MESS THIS UP CANON.
> 
> ...


Those who need at least 10 photos per second, should buy 1D series cameras, or its poor cousin 7D Mark II.

There is no market reason for a 5D camera series to 10 photos per second.


----------



## PureClassA (Jul 13, 2015)

Then buy a 1DX right now for $4000 or so. On the other hand, I'd love a Ferrari for a Lexus price.... If you are a professional in news and especially sports, with all due respect, you should already know better.



KanonKaz said:


> As a working photojournalist, I'm mainly interested in two things that my 5D Mark III doesn't have:
> 
> Shoot at a high frame rate. 7-8 FPS is not fast enough for sports and news in my opinion. I was under the impression that this camera would come with at least 10 FPS. PLEASE DON'T MESS THIS UP CANON.
> 
> ...


----------



## KanonKaz (Jul 13, 2015)

Do you guys know what most news photographers make? And what most freelance news photographers make? $7K is NOT an option. And most will not buy that. Nor will most newspapers fork over that kind of money for their staff when newspapers are barely hanging on. 

7D Mark II does not have a variable crop sensor. 1.6X is limited comparatively. First gen 1DX does not have a variable crop sensor either. The SD Mark IV could answer both of those issues. And it was reported on here that it would come with a 10 FPS drive.When you're on a limited budget, these are very real concerns. 

Canon has been getting smoked in the PJ market for the last few years now and there are obvious reasons why. Yes, I realize that market is small, but it's the market that changed things for Canon years ago when their autofocus was infinitely faster than anything Nikon came up with.


----------



## eninja (Jul 13, 2015)

rs said:


> candyman said:
> 
> 
> > All good and well...but please (and I am repeating myself : ) give us EC in Manual Mode when using auto ISO. Preferable with firmware update in 5D MK3
> ...


Correct me if I am really really wrong.. I find that a lot of people don't understand this feature.

In Manual mode for 6D (also 5Diii), you can not set exposure compensation - that is, when set to Auto ISO - the camera will register ISO to produce standard exposure, meaning, metering = 0.

The desired feature is the ability to set EC to +1 for instance, so that while in Auto ISO, ISO is set such that metering is +1, which is not available on 6D (also 5Diii)

Just sharing.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 13, 2015)

KanonKaz said:


> 7D Mark II does not have a variable crop sensor. 1.6X is limited comparatively. First gen 1DX does not have a variable crop sensor either. The SD Mark IV could answer both of those issues. And it was reported on here that it would come with a 10 FPS drive.When you're on a limited budget, these are very real concerns.



What exactly do you expect "variable crop" to do? It auto-crops pixels away for you. It "changes your view" as much as you can in post. It will not put more pixels on a smaller target. I really don't understand the appeal.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> KanonKaz said:
> 
> 
> > 7D Mark II does not have a variable crop sensor. 1.6X is limited comparatively. First gen 1DX does not have a variable crop sensor either. The SD Mark IV could answer both of those issues. And it was reported on here that it would come with a 10 FPS drive.When you're on a limited budget, these are very real concerns.
> ...



We understand a crop mode is not a teleconverter -- you gain no detail, agree. 

But for Nikon, it keeps your file size down and boosts your FPS. That's a nice option, isn't it?

- A


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 13, 2015)

RobertG. said:


> 24MP doesn't sound very convincing to me. If the sensor performs like the one in the 5D III, the cam is dead on arrival for me. Why not stick that 42MP Sony sensor into a 5D? It would justify a lot of R&D money. Make it 6FPS, proper AF, AE linked to AF points and all the other little things needed to make it slightly better than the Sony A7rII. Just offer the best sensor with the best AF in a 5D housing with the best weather sealing, dual card slots and longest battery life. I wouldn't mind if they limit the video features to protect their cinema line.



A7R II sensor and video in a 5D3 would be hecka awesome


----------



## davidmurray (Jul 13, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> A report over at Northlight mentions testing of the EOS 5D Mark IV.</p>
> <blockquote><p>There is still a mix between 18 and 24MP. 24MP is the likely final outcome, with the lower MP sensor testing AF speed and buffer management issues (less than 8FPS is the likely shooting speed).</p></blockquote>
> <p>We’ve heard recently that the camera is coming in 2016, with shipping of the C300 Mark II and EOS-1D X Mark II to happen before the EOS 5D Mark IV. There’s a lot of R&D dollars going into the 5D4 project, with the hopes of launching a product that is perceived to be a big jump in features and performance over the more-than-capable EOS 5D Mark III.</p>



Very happy with this report - assuming that 24MP is the way it's going. 8FPS is also good.

The big questions are:
+ what is the sensor noise going to be like,
+ what will the maximum high ISO that can result in professionally acceptable photographs, and
+ will auto focus work with F11 (i.e. with a slower big white and a 2x extender)?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 13, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> KanonKaz said:
> 
> 
> > 7D Mark II does not have a variable crop sensor. 1.6X is limited comparatively. First gen 1DX does not have a variable crop sensor either. The SD Mark IV could answer both of those issues. And it was reported on here that it would come with a 10 FPS drive.When you're on a limited budget, these are very real concerns.
> ...



The appeal is that if the 5Ds, say, had a real variable crop mode in RAW it might have been able to hit say 6-7fps in crop mode and had a nice, large buffer for action, and you don't waste a ton of card and disk space when shooting stuff like distant birds or whatnot. Look at how much of a more fully rounded camera it makes the D810. Imagine the D820 with the video and sensor of the A7R II and RAW crop mode.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Yeah but then they run the danger of people just keeping their 5D3 for stuff that needs it and adding Sony for everthing else and just ignore all this new Canon stuff (or maybe even going whole hog to Nikon).



I agree a lot of folks may hang on to their 5D3s, but if the 5D4 comes in with...


The 1DX II AF system (not an impossible ask if the 5D4 indeed comes out after)
4k video (I personally don't care about this, but it's a _massive_ want by videographers)
1 more stop high ISO performance
8 fps
-3 EV AF functionality (all but a certainty, right?)

...it will sell just fine.

But other than on the sensor side (resolution and sensor scores that everyone talks about), where is Canon being clearly out-featured or out-performed in the 5D3-level segment?

Do Nikon or Sony offer more FPS in their segment-similar offerings? The a7 rigs sit around 5 fps and the D750 (6.5) and the D810 (5) are basically right where the 5D3 is. 

Does Sony or Nikon have the same number of AF points / history of excellent tracking / etc.? I believe Sony's going bonkers with AF points & viewfinder coverage, but their history of AF tracking/tuning/reliability is not great. And Nikon's offerings are sub-par on the spec sheet (fewer points) and perhaps equivalent functionally. In other words, I've not heard a soul leave the 5D3 fold for AF reasons.

I don't want to sound brand-defensive here, I'm actually curious. I've just never heard anyone feel the 5D3 lets them down other than landscapers griping about low ISO DR and studio folks griping about pixels. 

- A


----------



## applecider (Jul 13, 2015)

Interesting thread in that each of us has a favorite issue that we want out of a 5d4 . The videographers want four k, the sporters want ten frames per sec, wild lifers and drinkers want better high ISO, and the photojournalist wants a 1 dx for cheap ( they can be had new for four k now... The price we all expect the five d four to cost.). Rather than make everyone happy I suspect that many will be just a little unhappy. I want more than 24 MP after waiting for four years and based on the competitions ability to produce better high ISO for wildlife and better noise with high MP sensors.

So for me I'd like to see first better high ISO and lower noise, 28-32 MP so some cropping can be done in post to the point where cropped 100 percent images hold up. 6-7 fps and wifi and gps in camera with intervalometer, and radio master.

I have to say I don't get the demand for in camera crop, just get a fast ssd put your card shots onto it and edit like white water in a waterfall. On the other hand I tink there's a menu where you can set exposure comp for manual.


----------



## PureClassA (Jul 13, 2015)

I'll say this much, if they manage to drop that C300 II sensor tech in a 5D4 less than a year from the 5DS release, it's gonna be a little bit of a bitter pill. I hope they do, it would be great. Certainly the 1DX must have it.


----------



## rs (Jul 13, 2015)

eninja said:


> rs said:
> 
> 
> > candyman said:
> ...



Yep, that's exactly what it does. Manual mode so you control the shutter speed for the desired exposure time and aperture for the desired DoF, and auto ISO so the camera meters this for you. My 5D2 won't even do that. What this adds over the 5D3/6D is EC in this mode so you can tweak the exposure, much like you already can in Av/Tv modes.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2015)

My general beef is that Canon's FF strategy seems awfully convoluted and specialized. Right now, it stands at:


6D --> base model. Solid FF sensor but very little else. Any major creature comforts (proper AF system, 100% VF coverage, 1/8000 shutter, etc.) is not offered with this rig.


5D3 --> Sliding down from 'best non-gripped' model down to 'average non-gripped' model, it's still an excellent all-around pro rig, lacking only a top class sensor and having almost everything else. Best in class at nothing, but very, very good at everything.


5DS/5DSR --> I know it will be sold alongside the 5D3, but those pixels cost extra. It originally appeared to be a specialist studio/landscape rig, but the high ISO performance was not nearly as bad as we thought it would be, so this rig could _loosely_ be considered a high MP variant of the 5D3, which means it's not a specialist camera by any means. This may turn out to be more popular than we first though it might be.


5D4 --> Seems like it will be a 5D3 with more fps, hopefully the 1DX II's AF system and hopefully a better new sensor. Video heavy, but still a great all-rounder.



1DX, 1DX II --> Will it become sports/wildlife _exclusive_ now? The old 1Ds studio/landscape camp may bail on the 1-series if the 5DS is their only high MP rig available.


All in all, it's a messy story/narrative feature set. Many photographers are stuck straddling two product lines for odd Canon-devised reasons: Consider:


Studio 1DX users have to choose between the 1-series body type OR a high MP body.
5D3 users are torn between chasing the pixels of the 5DS rigs (at the same sensor performance they have now) or waiting for what's behind door #2 with the 5D4.
And 6D users are going to have a whale of choice of paying probably too much at first for a slightly upmarket 6D2 vs. getting a full-featured but aging sensored 5D3 for about the same price (in a year or so). 

I often think they should simplify their FF lines into good / better / best and split the 1D line back into a sports variant and a studio/landscape variant. It seems a cleaner story with such a setup.

- A


----------



## KanonKaz (Jul 13, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> KanonKaz said:
> 
> 
> > 7D Mark II does not have a variable crop sensor. 1.6X is limited comparatively. First gen 1DX does not have a variable crop sensor either. The SD Mark IV could answer both of those issues. And it was reported on here that it would come with a 10 FPS drive.When you're on a limited budget, these are very real concerns.
> ...



Really? It makes a 300mm 2.8 at FF, 390mm 2.8 at 1.3 and a 480 2.8 at 1.6. That's a big advantage for any sports/news shooter. And no, I don't want to shoot at 300mm and crop in post. And no, I don't have time on deadline to shoot in Raw. Changing field of view while actually on the field is a big advantage. It eliminates the need for extra glass and carrying around multiple bodies....Esp on tight deadlines and long nights lugging around equipment.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 13, 2015)

I just had the chance to test my 5DsR for a week against a loaner Nikon D810A and Pentax 645z (and more cameras). Some of the 5DsR results were so much behind the competition that it can make you cry as a Canon user. Especially noise was more on GH4 levels, a good step behind Nikon and lightyears behind the 645z. The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed (ISO 100, f8, 1/4) so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise. I know medium format is different, but Canon will charge nearly the same for their next 1DX and nearly half for the 5D4 compared to the Pentax 645z. I hope that a huge company like Canon and decade-long world leader in camera technology should get their S___ together finally as we write the year 2015. The next cameras need to have significant improvements, or they will see that they lose lots of sales after they have lost their credibility.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 13, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise.



Jeez.....


----------



## TheJock (Jul 13, 2015)

Canon FF 5DsR looks OK to me stacked up against the MF 645z................which is more than double the price!


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 13, 2015)

Stewart K said:


> Canon FF 5DsR looks OK to me stacked up against the MF 645z................which is more than double the price!



Imagine what it would have been like if he had exposed even remotely in the right zone.


----------



## eninja (Jul 13, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> I just had the chance to test my 5DsR for a week against a loaner Nikon D810A and Pentax 645z (and more cameras). Some of the 5DsR results were so much behind the competition that it can make you cry as a Canon user. Especially noise was more on GH4 levels, a good step behind Nikon and lightyears behind the 645z. The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed (ISO 100, f8, 1/4) so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise. I know medium format is different, but Canon will charge nearly the same for their next 1DX and nearly half for the 5D4 compared to the Pentax 645z. I hope that a huge company like Canon and decade-long world leader in camera technology should get their S___ together finally as we write the year 2015. The next cameras need to have significant improvements, or they will see that they lose lots of sales after they have lost their credibility.



Hi, I want to take this opportunity to ask. Why would you underexpose the shot? Is this the normal way to take nice photos? How is the comparison when both was taken with good exposure. I am not trying to troll, I am just trying to see, how you guys see it. I am a beginner on this.


----------



## David (Jul 13, 2015)

eninja said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > I just had the chance to test my 5DsR for a week against a loaner Nikon D810A and Pentax 645z (and more cameras). Some of the 5DsR results were so much behind the competition that it can make you cry as a Canon user. Especially noise was more on GH4 levels, a good step behind Nikon and lightyears behind the 645z. The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed (ISO 100, f8, 1/4) so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise. I know medium format is different, but Canon will charge nearly the same for their next 1DX and nearly half for the 5D4 compared to the Pentax 645z. I hope that a huge company like Canon and decade-long world leader in camera technology should get their S___ together finally as we write the year 2015. The next cameras need to have significant improvements, or they will see that they lose lots of sales after they have lost their credibility.
> ...





eninja said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > I just had the chance to test my 5DsR for a week against a loaner Nikon D810A and Pentax 645z (and more cameras). Some of the 5DsR results were so much behind the competition that it can make you cry as a Canon user. Especially noise was more on GH4 levels, a good step behind Nikon and lightyears behind the 645z. The attached pic shows a direct comparison with the Pentax of a night street scene that was intentionally underexposed (ISO 100, f8, 1/4) so the jpg's did nearly show black only. After pushing the Raws of both cameras with same settings, the 645z image did bring out a completely useful result as if the picture was exposed correctly, while the 5DsR image had nothing left than distorted noise. I know medium format is different, but Canon will charge nearly the same for their next 1DX and nearly half for the 5D4 compared to the Pentax 645z. I hope that a huge company like Canon and decade-long world leader in camera technology should get their S___ together finally as we write the year 2015. The next cameras need to have significant improvements, or they will see that they lose lots of sales after they have lost their credibility.
> ...


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 13, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> Stewart K said:
> 
> 
> > Canon FF 5DsR looks OK to me stacked up against the MF 645z................which is more than double the price!
> ...



Lots of shots who are exposed right have clipped highlights or shadow zones that need to be brought back in Raw, otherwise nobody would do multi exposure shots or stack images for best results. It seems the people at Ricoh have found a way to give a 645z much more dynamic range on both ends than any Canon camera, with far less noise in it. The good question is: does Canon hold back the many qualities and features other manufacturers have because of marketing and sales strategies, or do they simply can't do it better? Then they should headhunt the right people from other companies, like it seems Sigma has done it 2-4 years ago to improve their products.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jul 13, 2015)

I think of the 7D-II as an example of Canon exceeding my expectations. I expected it to offer 20MP at 8fps with 51pt AF system. It turned out to feautre 20MP at 10fps with 65pt AF system. I was hopeful for improved DR and 4K in the 7D-II but it didn't come. As camera meant for shooting action (e.g. sports and wildlife) I think the 7D-II functions pretty well.

What is a 5D Mark-IV meant for? Is the 5D-IV only meant to cater to the needs of current 5D-III users, or must it also cater to the needs of that handful of photographers who bought a 1D-C?


----------



## scyrene (Jul 13, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Stewart K said:
> ...



If you're going to make these comparisons, choosing two different sensor sizes is not a reasonable way to go. By all means compare the A7RII or D810 to the 5Ds(r), but not the 645z. Although this is all old news. We KNOW if you underexpose, Sony sensor shots can be brightened with better results than Canon sensor shots. It's been discussed in almost every thread on this site


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 13, 2015)

If the 5D IV comes out with a 24-28mp sensor with 14-15 stops DR it will be just on those parameters alone a happy balance between resolution and dynamic range because you cannot have everything and do everything well in one package. Low light cameras need larger pixels its not a new science, and resolution needs small pixels. The AF points spread more outwards across the frame is definately a feature they should add. Over and above that the present 5D III does most things really well and if they do pull off better DR then 4K is bound to follow but knowing Canon it will still be H.264 not H.265 but I could be wrong. They should also move the camera to CFast with a secondary SD slot.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 13, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> My general beef is that Canon's FF strategy seems awfully convoluted and specialized. Right now, it stands at:
> 
> 
> 6D --> base model. Solid FF sensor but very little else. Any major creature comforts (proper AF system, 100% VF coverage, 1/8000 shutter, etc.) is not offered with this rig.
> ...


The current 6D has two features that ARE very useful a. Wi-Fi and b. GPS built-in. I would like to see 100% viewfinder and better DR with better low light noise control and NO banding. The AF system clearly needs improvement but this camera is primarily a "travel" camera not an action camera. Finally I think the range is fine car companies have increased niche models why not camera companies?


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 13, 2015)

I still maintain we may see an interchangeable prism on the 5DIV if it is to be more video orientated. Private pointed out about a year ago; these kind of innovations have always been seen on the 1 series first, but I think when it comes to video in a dslr the 5 series is the way to go.

Not difficult to do; one interchangeable head - slides into the top of the body like the old F-1 and F2/3 camera, a pentaprism. The second an EVF. Slides in the same, contacts plug in once fully home, mirror automatically locks up, DPAF used for focus off the sensor, and you have your mirrorless EVF 5D without upsetting people like me 

In fact Canon, if you don't do this now you'd better get me on the development team quick. My rates are, well, negotiable.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 13, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> We understand a crop mode is not a teleconverter -- you gain no detail, agree.
> 
> But for Nikon, it keeps your file size down and boosts your FPS. That's a nice option, isn't it?
> 
> - A



It was first mentioned in this thread by KanonKaz, who said:

"And....The variable crop sensor at Full, 1.3X and 1.6X. Important to have various lengths when shooting sports, and news as well."

Not a word about framerate or file size, but rather "various lengths". Variable crop factor doesn't achieve that.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 13, 2015)

KanonKaz said:


> Really? It makes a 300mm 2.8 at FF, 390mm 2.8 at 1.3 and a 480 2.8 at 1.6. That's a big advantage for any sports/news shooter. And no, I don't want to shoot at 300mm and crop in post. And no, I don't have time on deadline to shoot in Raw. Changing field of view while actually on the field is a big advantage. It eliminates the need for extra glass and carrying around multiple bodies....Esp on tight deadlines and long nights lugging around equipment.



It does no such thing; it auto-crops the edges of the frame. It does not change the focal length of the lens. It does not provide more detail. It does save some file size (might be relevant for bandwidth, but storage is dirt cheap) and framerate (if the rest of the camera can operate at a higher rate and is only limited by internal bandwidth).

What does cropping have to do with shooting RAW? You can crop JPEGs (or BMPs, PNGs...). Unless your framing is always perfect, you or your editor will have to do that anyway.


----------



## kevl (Jul 13, 2015)

If the 5DIV is 24MP and doesn't absolutely stomp on everything else out there in the dynamic range and high ISO performance areas it will be dead in the water. 

Who would buy such a camera? Canon needs to stop protecting their over priced products by crippling their lower products. 

If the future of Canon is mediocrity then it becomes worth it to consider switching systems to Nikon or just going to Sony and using Canon glass. 

I don't need a $4000 consumer camera... I won't even consider purchasing one.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 13, 2015)

dilbert said:


> kevl said:
> 
> 
> > If the 5DIV is 24MP and doesn't absolutely stomp on everything else out there in the dynamic range and high ISO performance areas it will be dead in the water.
> ...



I don't expect there are, but if you're right, then they're not dead in the water. Either way I think anyone who feels desperate to upgrade to the latest thing all the time has more money than sense, but I guess that's one of the bases of consumerism.


----------



## shutterlag (Jul 13, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > Stewart K said:
> ...



The Ricoh folks haven't found a way - the folks at Sony who made the sensor did


----------



## gsealy (Jul 13, 2015)

I use the 5DIII in a lot of different ways. One of them is shooting video with external recording. Modest increases in MP and/or better ISO performance are nice, but they are not enough to sway me to spend $4K on the 5DIV. But if the 5DIV has 4K video that I can record externally, then that is a different story and I am in the market. I like the value and flexibility that I have with 5DIII. So I want the same thing in the 5DIV.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2015)

kevl said:


> If the future of Canon is mediocrity then it becomes worth it to consider switching systems to Nikon or just going to Sony and using Canon glass.
> 
> I don't need a $4000 consumer camera... I won't even consider purchasing one.



I won't talk you down from that ledge. Go to Sony and Nikon. Do it. Nothing is stopping you. That added DR will win you a Pulitzer, I'm sure.

But keep in mind, most professionals keep buying 5D3's and racking up awards with them. There's more to a camera body than low-ISO DR and how many pixels you have.

- A


----------



## rs (Jul 13, 2015)

KanonKaz said:


> LonelyBoy said:
> 
> 
> > KanonKaz said:
> ...


It turns a 300/2.8 into a 480/2.8? That's quite a magical ability! If only it cropped more, then it could make an 800/2.8 out of the pancake 40/2.8! ???


----------



## youngjediboy (Jul 13, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> kevl said:
> 
> 
> > If the future of Canon is mediocrity then it becomes worth it to consider switching systems to Nikon or just going to Sony and using Canon glass.
> ...



You don't need to talk anyone down from moving away from Canon. That's Canon's job and so far they've been doing a terrible job. You're totally right, the camera is just a tool and won't automatically make your work better and win you awards. BUT the vast majority of people who spend money on these aren't doing it to win awards, they use them to earn an living, make some extra side money, for family/fun/personal use, etc. 

As customers, if a company is no longer making compelling products, we will no longer purchase from them and go to other companies who will make better products. I've enjoyed Canon products for years and I hope I will continue to IF Canon continues to make good products. If Sony, Panasonic and others make better products, I will buy those. It's simple. You don't need to stop us and it's not your job to do so (unless you work in Canon's marketing team in which case get your ass to work!)


----------



## Silvertt7 (Jul 13, 2015)

What I'm looking for most, which will determine whether I keep 5D Mark III or make the upgrade: 

-Spot metering at each AF point. Currently lacking behind competition.
-Respectable DR improvement. Currently lacking behind competition.
-More AF points. The Mark III's AF count and spread is not bad, but no doubt it can be improved by including more that fills out the frame. 
-Bonus that would be greatly appreciated but not expected: Swivel screen.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2015)

youngjediboy said:


> You don't need to talk anyone down from moving away from Canon. That's Canon's job and so far they've been doing a terrible job. You're totally right, the camera is just a tool and won't automatically make your work better and win you awards. BUT the vast majority of people who spend money on these aren't doing it to win awards, they use them to earn an living, make some extra side money, for family/fun/personal use, etc.
> 
> As customers, if a company is no longer making compelling products, we will no longer purchase from them and go to other companies who will make better products. I've enjoyed Canon products for years and I hope I will continue to IF Canon continues to make good products. If Sony, Panasonic and others make better products, I will buy those. It's simple. You don't need to stop us and it's not your job to do so (unless you work in Canon's marketing team in which case get your ass to work!)



That's entirely fair, but Canon's being beaten on the sensor front annnnnd... _where else?_ Flash sync speed, perhaps?  Every other aspect of my 5D3 remains the best possible option for the dollar for me and my needs -- the build, the AF, the ergonomics, the handling, the lenses, accessories, ecosystem, etc.

Consider my pixel-equivalent alternatives:

I could move to the D750, which despite having a slightly better sensor and +0.5 fps, offers little else. Given that rig is equal parts D610 as it is D810, I don't really consider it an upgrade to my (generally) top-spec'd 5D3.

I could move to the a7 II, which again has a slightly better sensor... _and three times as many crippling limitations associated with a move to a mirrorless platform_. I'd love that sensor, and I would curse the AF, battery life and responsiveness all day. If I was a dedicated landscaper, I would consider that move. Anything else, I'd stick with my mirror.

Please forgive me, I'm not trying to wind anyone up -- but it seems like we're comically over-prioritizing the sensor over other considerations. I am 100% confident that migrating to another platform will leave me less happy overall and most certainly for the worse financially.

- A


----------



## johnhenry (Jul 13, 2015)

without a huge pixel number jump, or 4K video, a 5Ds or r would make sense


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 13, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Every other aspect of my 5D3 remains the best possible option for the dollar for me and my needs -- the build, the AF, the ergonomics, the handling, the lenses, accessories, ecosystem, etc.
> 
> ...that's exactly the problem: they lead in all the aspects mentioned here and we love Canon for it, but in all the many other important aspects they are way behind. If Canon doesnt change anything, using a new Canon DSLR will be a stupid thing as you paid premium prices for it, but are not able to work with premium quality and features.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Every other aspect of my 5D3 remains the best possible option for the dollar for me and my needs -- the build, the AF, the ergonomics, the handling, the lenses, accessories, ecosystem, etc.
> ...



I hear you, but please be more clear. What are "all the many other important aspects" are they behind in _besides the sensor?_

- A


----------



## asmundma (Jul 13, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> youngjediboy said:
> 
> 
> > You don't need to talk anyone down from moving away from Canon. That's Canon's job and so far they've been doing a terrible job. You're totally right, the camera is just a tool and won't automatically make your work better and win you awards. BUT the vast majority of people who spend money on these aren't doing it to win awards, they use them to earn an living, make some extra side money, for family/fun/personal use, etc.
> ...



Agree, A7 ii did not offer to much compared to 5D3, except some weight, stabilisation, and little better picture quality . 
The A7r ii will do, better autofocus then previous A7(s) (remains to be tested fully), 4k video and high resolution, better ISO, etc. I sincerely doubt 5D4 will be able to compete. 
My plan is to keep my 1Dx for sports and wildlife and then slightly moved over to Sony for the rest.... (high resolution - already move over for video). 
The question now is - Will Sony be able to deliver A/r ii end of this month??


----------



## unfocused (Jul 13, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > Every other aspect of my 5D3 remains the best possible option for the dollar for me and my needs -- the build, the AF, the ergonomics, the handling, the lenses, accessories, ecosystem, etc.
> ...



Please provide a list of "all the many other important aspects" where Canon is "way behind."

The sensor chart included in another thread, indicates that the new high resolution Canon 5Ds has about 1/3 of a stop less dynamic range at ISO 400 than a competitor with considerably less resolution. That's insignificant, not "way behind."

Please note also that in a recent interview (referenced in another thread) a top Sony executive admitted that their mirrorless cameras are not as good as DSLRs, but getting closer. That sounds to me like the competition believes Canon is ahead, not "way behind."

And, while you are at it, please provide some market research to demonstrate that the aspects you are referencing are indeed "important," because the marketplace doesn't seem to think Canon is "way behind" in areas are that important enough to cause buyers to choose another brand.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 13, 2015)

KanonKaz said:


> Really? It makes a 300mm 2.8 at FF, 390mm 2.8 at 1.3 and a 480 2.8 at 1.6. That's a big advantage for any sports/news shooter. And no, I don't want to shoot at 300mm and crop in post. And no, I don't have time on deadline to shoot in Raw. Changing field of view while actually on the field is a big advantage. It eliminates the need for extra glass and carrying around multiple bodies....Esp on tight deadlines and long nights lugging around equipment.



How does it make the lenses 390mm and 480mm? It doesn't in any way that matters for sports since only the FOV changes after the fact (not in the VF, where the extra FOV of FF, for a given photosite density, is a plus, since you get same reach but easier tracking) and not the reach change.

Pretty much every sport image taken has to get cropped one way or another in post anyway.


----------



## msm (Jul 13, 2015)

unfocused said:


> Please note also that in a recent interview (referenced in another thread) a top Sony executive admitted that their mirrorless cameras are not as good as DSLRs, but getting closer. That sounds to me like the competition believes Canon is ahead, not "way behind."



If you are talking about the dpreview interview, then he was talking about autofocus performance.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 13, 2015)

msm said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > Please note also that in a recent interview (referenced in another thread) a top Sony executive admitted that their mirrorless cameras are not as good as DSLRs, but getting closer. That sounds to me like the competition believes Canon is ahead, not "way behind."
> ...



Yes. I'd rather have a camera that focuses than one that has lots of dynamic range.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 13, 2015)

Please provide a list of "all the many other important aspects" where Canon is "way behind."

...if you have a chance to work for a while with a 1DC, 645z, GH4, D810, A7S etc you will see how many things you hate about the limitations of a 5D3, 5Ds or 7D2: dynamic range, noise, no 4k video, missing swivel screen, no internal stabilization, missing focus peaking etc. The 645z for example is not mirrorless and not for video, but still has decent focus peaking, which is a great help for manual lenses and has nothing to do with sensor size etc. The A7RII will give the option to use speedboosters in crop mode, which means you could use a Zeiss Otus that has one stop more light and is stabilized. Canon won't have all these advantages in their 5D4. It's a shame because the Canon lens lineup is the best, and the body handling as well. Workflow and image results are just better with other cameras. Canon most likely could deliver much more, but won't do because obviously still too many users have been too loyal or too uninformed to realize that and didnt vote with their wallets yet. I say this as a user who owns 100+ Canon products including always the latest top gear.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 13, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Please provide a list of "all the many other important aspects" where Canon is "way behind."
> 
> ...if you have a chance to work for a while with a 1DC, 645z, GH4, D810, A7S etc you will see how many things you hate about the limitations of a 5D3, 5Ds or 7D2: dynamic range, noise, no 4k video, missing swivel screen, no internal stabilization, missing focus peaking etc. The 645z for example is not mirrorless and not for video, but still has decent focus peaking, which is a great help for manual lenses and has nothing to do with sensor size etc. The A7RII will give the option to use speedboosters in crop mode, which means you could use a Zeiss Otus that has one stop more light and is stabilized. Canon won't have all these advantages in their 5D4. It's a shame because the Canon lens lineup is the best, and the body handling as well. Workflow and image results are just better with other cameras. Canon most likely could deliver much more, but won't do because obviously still too many users have been too loyal or too uninformed to realize that and didnt vote with their wallets yet. I say this as a user who owns 100+ Canon products including always the latest top gear.



A list of grievances that aren't all sensor related! Bravo. Now we're talking. 

IBIS is nice I suppose, but I don't personally have a cabinet of old non-IS lenses I'd like to shoot with, so I don't personally need it. (I seem to recall on-lens IS is more effective than IBIS, but that's a little out of my wheelhouse -- I'm not sure on that.) But sure, I could see folks putting that to use.

+1 on screen options in general. I've long been a proponent of Canon scooping everyone with a standardized weathersealed mount to let us change out the back LCD for different options: rigid w/o touch would be default, but there would be options for rigid w/touch, tilt only, tilt & swivel, etc. Then for a little extra money and a few added SKUs, Canon could say YES to any user preference on this, and despite the added cost, everyone gets what they want. 

My theory on 4K is that it's 100% going to be on-board the 5D4 at launch, but stubborn old Canon might not announce that it's on-board and they'd lock it out with firmware (just at first) to see if they can keep up the Cinema EOS sales. If When that fails epically, Canon swoops in with a firmware update and the 4K will be unlocked -- not as a klugy post-market fix, but as a from-the-ground-up properly designed-in feature.

- A


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 13, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Please provide a list of "all the many other important aspects" where Canon is "way behind."
> 
> ...if you have a chance to work for a while with a 1DC, 645z, GH4, D810, A7S etc you will see how many things you hate about the limitations of a 5D3, 5Ds or 7D2: dynamic range, noise, no 4k video, missing swivel screen, no internal stabilization, missing focus peaking etc. The 645z for example is not mirrorless and not for video, but still has decent focus peaking, which is a great help for manual lenses and has nothing to do with sensor size etc. The A7RII will give the option to use speedboosters in crop mode, which means you could use a Zeiss Otus that has one stop more light and is stabilized. Canon won't have all these advantages in their 5D4. It's a shame because the Canon lens lineup is the best, and the body handling as well. Workflow and image results are just better with other cameras. Canon most likely could deliver much more, but won't do because obviously still too many users have been too loyal or too uninformed to realize that and didnt vote with their wallets yet. I say this as a user who owns 100+ Canon products including always the latest top gear.



Note everyone cares about all that though - without caring for manual focus, focus peaking doesn't appeal. I always shoot through the viewfinder, so a swivel screen doesn't appeal either. Never shot a second of video so I don't care a whit for 4k.

And, of course, you started your list of "other aspects than sensor where Canon is way behind" with "DR and noise".


----------



## Silvertt7 (Jul 14, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Please provide a list of "all the many other important aspects" where Canon is "way behind."
> ...



If you've even done even a little bit of work near water you will realize how invaluable a swivel screen is... In fact, there are plenty of times where creativity and composition require an odd angle, making looking at the viewfinder impossible. You either shoot blind and take multiple shots or use a swivel.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 14, 2015)

It's especially important to note that some of us users are mad about Canon not just only because they hold back technology intentionally while the products are expensive. Maybe that always has been the case, but historically it was never that obvious as it is now. As an owner of a Canon 5D2 in November 2008, would i have complained the same way? Not at all, the other manufacturers did hardly have anything better to offer, and Canon was on top and innovative by bringing the 1080p video mode to full frame. But right now in July 2015, all other manufacturers are more innovative and seem to care about consumers, and there's lots of attractive features offered to them. Canon should better be implementing any imaginable feature they have on their internal 5D4 possibility list, otherwise their DSLR branch could go the Nokia way.


----------



## kevl (Jul 14, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> kevl said:
> 
> 
> > If the future of Canon is mediocrity then it becomes worth it to consider switching systems to Nikon or just going to Sony and using Canon glass.
> ...



LOL


----------



## kevl (Jul 14, 2015)

youngjediboy said:


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



+1 

I love my 5D3. If the AF points would glow red in the dark it would be everything I want right now. 

That being said, when I spend 3-4K next year on a new body it is going to be the best my money can buy. Obviously I will consider more than DR and ISO performance, but I won't ignore those things either.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2015)

Silvertt7 said:


> If you've even done even a little bit of work near water you will realize how invaluable a swivel screen is...



_*...to you.*_

To others, a tilty/swively screen is: 


A surface/seam/area for fluid and particulate ingress
A nearly-essential component to the operation of the camera that has now been saddled with mechanical and electrical failure modes that did not exist with a solid/integral screen
Largely relegated to LiveView use, which is only practical for some shooting applications

So as useful as they might be for some people in some circumstances, others want nothing to do with them.

And Nikon and Canon's market research backs that up -- they believe that the tilt-swivel crowd are generally in the consumer and prosumer lines. Of all of their current FF models (of which I believe there are 9 models still being made today), only one has a tilt -- the D750. Apparently, FF buyers are less interested in that feature as the 70D, D5500, Rebel, etc. users are.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> It's especially important to note that some of us users are mad about Canon not just only because they hold back technology intentionally while the products are expensive. Maybe that always has been the case, but historically it was never that obvious as it is now. As an owner of a Canon 5D2 in November 2008, would i have complained the same way? Not at all, the other manufacturers did hardly have anything better to offer, and Canon was on top and innovative by bringing the 1080p video mode to full frame. But right now in July 2015, all other manufacturers are more innovative and seem to care about consumers, and there's lots of attractive features offered to them. Canon should better be implementing any imaginable feature they have on their internal 5D4 possibility list, otherwise their DSLR branch could go the Nokia way.



All good points, thank you.

I think this is a clear user-expectation fault-line between Canon/Nikon and Sony.

Sony has built an army of users who love to dabble and bolt weird sh-- together. Partially, this is the upside of a small flange distance, IBIS, etc. -- it lets you breathe new life into old lenses, give a speedbooster a try, or it lets you bolt Canon glass on to your A7. That is value. But it's also representative of a culture of photographers who are making due with grand ambitions in a puny ecosystem of native products -- in many instances, the photographer was not excited to use an adapter _but had to because Sony doesn't offer that lens yet_.

Canon/Nikon folks -- esp. longtime users -- can certainly turn their nose up at adapters, third party flash gear, etc. because they are accustomed to having exactly what they need in their own first-party ecosystem.

So it's easy to see Sony as some exciting wild west sort of wingin'-it experience, where -- if you are crafty and patient to fight through some limitations of the tech -- you can do some things no one else can.

And then there are big/slow/safe Canon and Nikon, where there is little appetite to bolt an Otus on to a speedbooster. They just prefer to keep everything in-house, use stuff that works exactly the way they want it to, and take pictures. No alarms and no surprises. Everything works, but it's not always sexy.

Neither group/direction is better than the other. But each of us naturally falls into one of the two sets of sensibilities, I think.

- A


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 14, 2015)

Silvertt7 said:


> If you've even done even a little bit of work near water you will realize how invaluable a swivel screen is... In fact, there are plenty of times where creativity and composition require an odd angle, making looking at the viewfinder impossible. You either shoot blind and take multiple shots or use a swivel.



I live in central Texas. Not much water around, and I don't shoot around it. This only drives home the fact that things that are important to one shooter may not be to another.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2015)

dilbert said:


> Try getting a shot that is...
> - from knee height or lower (if you want extra points, make the surface muddy or water/wet)
> - from above your head and straight ahead (put a fence or people in your way)
> ... without a swivel screen.
> ...



Dilbert, I hear you -- the upsides are clear. But some folks are leery about breaking off their LCD or it conking out on them in the field. A solid screen is more robust -- that can't be really be denied, can it?

I'm just saying that right now, the number of folks who value LCD robustness outnumber those who want it to swivel... _in the FF segment._ Clearly that's not the case elsewhere.

- A


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2015)

dilbert said:


> If the problem is as bad as you make it out to be, why aren't forums filled with people talking about it?
> 
> You're more likely to find that a broken screen is more of a problem than a broken swivel mechanism.



You may 100% be right. I don't think it's an epidemic -- I think it's a _perception_, and that's driving the market's relative valuation of the feature.

I'm working under the assumption that a basic market preference is competently being captured by two mature companies, and that preference is that FF buyers don't want to risk a swivel or see little value in it. 

What's missing is Canon/Nikon rolling up their sleeves to defeat that perception with data. Perhaps if they published their torture testing or gave word of 1 year of rough field testing, perceptions might change.

- A


----------



## Famateur (Jul 14, 2015)

Just thinking about that interview of a high-up Canon dude in which he stated that Canon would choose the best sensor available, regardless of maker. 

When the 5DS(R) was announced, it was (at the time) the best sensor, regardless of maker -- for its intended purpose: 50MP resolution. Clearly that was Canon's top priority with these new bodies.

Then I think about the interview (same one?) in which the Canon dude indicated that they would focus on resolution with one body and light sensitivity with another (I would expect 5DS(R) for resolution and 5DIV for sensitivity).

With the R&D put into Dual Pixel AF (and now Hexa Pixel?), I get the feeling that Canon intends to stick with its own in-house sensors for its high-end DSLRs.

We now hear rumors that a lot of R&D has gone into the 5DIV which might explain a later announcement/launch than many would like.

I'm cautiously optimistic that the sensor that goes into the 5DIV will be the best sensor available at the time -- regardless of maker -- for its purpose (sensitivity). Can't wait to see what is eventually announced...

Naive optimism? Perhaps. Canon didn't get to the top by being stupid, and while I see many of the same red flags as others (from the outside), I'm not as eager to label them as another Kodak...

Carry on...


----------



## Famateur (Jul 14, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > If the problem is as bad as you make it out to be, why aren't forums filled with people talking about it?
> ...



As a fan of articulating screens, this has been a fun side discussion to follow. Seems like well reasoned thoughts on both sides. While the three Canon bodies I've had with articulating screens (going back to 2004?), all still work as they did on day one (despite snow, salt water and desert sand dunes*), I get the concerns that pros would have. Torture testing data would be cool.

One thought: Nikon's FF body with an articulating screen happens to be the most recently released, and it was a first for the FF lineup. Seems like that body was intended to get close-ish to a 5DIII for people wanting to spend a bit less. It'll be interesting to see if more Nikon FF bodies sport the articulating screen or if this was just one more feature to throw at it to compensate for where it lags the 5DIII.

I personally hope Canon slaps an articulating screen on at least the 6DII. 

* While the screen swivels smoothly, you should hear the sandy grind when the lens retracts on my g12! The photos captured made it all worth it, though. Most of that sand has fallen out somewhere along the way since...


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2015)

Famateur said:


> Just thinking about that interview of a high-up Canon dude in which he stated that Canon would choose the best sensor available, regardless of maker.
> 
> When the 5DS(R) was announced, it was (at the time) the best sensor, regardless of maker -- for its intended purpose: 50MP resolution. Clearly that was Canon's top priority with these new bodies.
> 
> [ truncated ]



I think Canon will buy where they are hopelessly behind (i.e. 1" sensors) and build everywhere else, especially on the top end. 

Partially it's pride, but I imagine economics has a lot to do with it. The number of people who might flee the company because sensor reviews are not best-in-class represent a small but measurable dollar/yen value. But buying Sony's sensors will not be cheap either, and it will undercut their profitability to some extent. You *know* there is some statistical sales bean-counter-y marketing guy who has run the numbers on this and said that it doesn't add up.

Also, I wonder about Sony getting a head start with all of these slick new sensors. Consider: where's the Nikon D820 (or D900) announcement we're all waiting for? A sensor isn't a piece of code or API you can integrate into your stuff as the bugs are being worked out -- you have to wait for it to arrive and then figure out how best to use it. Sony has to have a time-to-market advantage over its licensees, which would compound the penalty Canon is under (dollars, and now _time_) to use their sensors.

So as much as it could make sense to buy a top-end FF sensor, I think there's wisdom in Canon not snapping up Sony's best tech. Just like bolting a Canon lens on to an a7 with the promise of native AF performance, it looks good on paper but the realities of it might be a b----.

- A


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 14, 2015)

I really would love to see the numbers when Canon releases one 5D4 with and one without swivel screen for the same money. I can't imagine more than 10% choosing the one without. Been travelling the world in all weather conditions and never had a problem with swivel screens or external monitor solutions, but hated the cameras who didn't have them 1000 times. If someone breaks the swivel screen, he probably has smashed the whole camera or treated it in a bad way pros wouldnt normally do it. I guess the "I don't want a swivel screen" talk comes more from the perspective of someone who is invested in cameras who don't have it, or needs to stick to product lines who don't have it, and talks himself into the idea that less features are better anyway.


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> I really would love to see the numbers when Canon releases one 5D4 with and one without swivel screen for the same money. I can't imagine more than 10% choosing the one without. Been travelling the world in all weather conditions and never had a problem with swivel screens or external monitor solutions, but hated the cameras who didn't have them 1000 times. If someone breaks the swivel screen, he probably has smashed the whole camera or treated it in a bad way pros wouldnt normally do it. I guess the "I don't want a swivel screen" talk comes more from the perspective of someone who is invested in cameras who don't have it, or needs to stick to product lines who don't have it, and talks himself into the idea that less features are better anyway.



Re: the first blue passage above: that's not reasonable -- an articulating screen has more components and costs more. A more reasonable question would be if offered two models of 5D4, would you pay $75 more for a swivel screen, and yeah, I think it would be a great experiment to run. It will not be 90-10 _or Canon would already be offering it_. This is ground floor market research -- they've done it, and this end of their market doesn't want it that badly (apparently).

That will likely change over time as fans of the middle trim-lines with tilting screens grow to love and trust them to hold up, but for now, the market apparently isn't there.

As for the second passage: good lord, I'm not arguing for a non-articulating screen to validate my 5D3 purchase, convinced the world I'm right or to win an argument in an online forum. I'm not 14 years old. I am trying to explain there might be a reason why Canon and Nikon aren't all-in with tilting screens other than 'they are idiots' or 'they are greedy' or 'they don't listen to us'. If they felt it would move more units, I'm sure they'd offer it.

- A


----------



## Famateur (Jul 14, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > I really would love to see the numbers when Canon releases one 5D4 with and one without swivel screen for the same money. I can't imagine more than 10% choosing the one without. Been travelling the world in all weather conditions and never had a problem with swivel screens or external monitor solutions, but hated the cameras who didn't have them 1000 times. If someone breaks the swivel screen, he probably has smashed the whole camera or treated it in a bad way pros wouldnt normally do it. I guess the "I don't want a swivel screen" talk comes more from the perspective of someone who is invested in cameras who don't have it, or needs to stick to product lines who don't have it, and talks himself into the idea that less features are better anyway.
> ...



Well put. I'm firmly in the camp that believes Canon does plenty of in-depth market research and will move when the market (en masse) demands.


----------



## applecider (Jul 14, 2015)

The articulated screen issue is exactly why a new 5DIV should have WiFi and decent cellphone eos remote apps.

If cell phones or better yet tablets could be used to do screen duplication then articulating screens would be potentially redundant. Of course it would be a bit of a kludge, but having an entire tablet screen to live view would be killa. And you make the remote release redundant and think of the potential for putting focus peaking and intervalometer function on the external screen. Maybe I'm just too geeky.


----------



## Tugela (Jul 14, 2015)

Famateur said:


> Just thinking about that interview of a high-up Canon dude in which he stated that Canon would choose the best sensor available, regardless of maker.
> 
> When the 5DS(R) was announced, it was (at the time) the best sensor, regardless of maker -- for its intended purpose: 50MP resolution. Clearly that was Canon's top priority with these new bodies.
> 
> ...



They can say all they want, but they have to stick with their own sensors because their mirrorless competitors sure as hell are not going to give them the good stuff until it has been out for a few years and is about to be superseded by the next generation. Canon have no choice. There will be marketing spin of course, but in the end they will have to use their own dated tech because no one will give them the modern stuff. But in the long run the companies with experience in silicon development are going to win out because that is where the future of photography lies.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 14, 2015)

Well put. I'm firmly in the camp that believes Canon does plenty of in-depth market research and will move when the market (en masse) demands.
[/quote]

Indeed Canon does plenty of excellent market research, unfortunately their conclusion is to squeeze as much money out of the consumers for as long as possible by splitting requested features into many different products, instead of thinking what the people really want. Many want to have high photo resolution and 4K alongside swivel screens, higher dynamic range etc at the same time in one product. As a Canon user, right now you would have to buy and carry around a 5DsR, a 760D and a C300II to do something similar you could with one Sony A7RII, while spending 6x as much money. Consumers should demand what's in the best interest of their own bank account, and not Canon's bank account. I personally would even buy a C300II although it's twice expensive as the Sony FS7, but i won't because they save 4K 60fps for the even more expensive C500II that will cost 3.5x as much as the Sony. This is where my brand loyalty ends.


----------



## romanr74 (Jul 14, 2015)

dilbert said:


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



Did I ever mention that I hate swivel-screens?


----------



## scyrene (Jul 14, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> It's especially important to note that some of us users are mad about Canon not just only because they hold back technology intentionally while the products are expensive. Maybe that always has been the case, but historically it was never that obvious as it is now. As an owner of a Canon 5D2 in November 2008, would i have complained the same way? Not at all, the other manufacturers did hardly have anything better to offer, and Canon was on top and innovative by bringing the 1080p video mode to full frame. But right now in July 2015, all other manufacturers are more innovative and seem to care about consumers, and there's lots of attractive features offered to them. Canon should better be implementing any imaginable feature they have on their internal 5D4 possibility list, otherwise their DSLR branch could go the Nokia way.



I genuinely don't understand this attitude. If they charge too much for a product that's underspecified for my needs, I go elsewhere - I don't get angry with them. If people are still buying their products then they can't be doing that badly overall.


----------



## Takingshots (Jul 14, 2015)

After the release of Sony A7R mkii, I think imo Canon might be delaying the 5D mk iv to see if they can fine tune better with what they thought would be good enough for its 2016 release....


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 14, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Indeed Canon does plenty of excellent market research, unfortunately their conclusion is to squeeze as much money out of the consumers for as long as possible by splitting requested features into many different products, instead of thinking what the people really want. Many want to have high photo resolution and 4K alongside swivel screens, higher dynamic range etc at the same time in one product. As a Canon user, right now you would have to buy and carry around a 5DsR, a 760D and a C300II to do something similar you could with one Sony A7RII, while spending 6x as much money. Consumers should demand what's in the best interest of their own bank account, and not Canon's bank account. I personally would even buy a C300II although it's twice expensive as the Sony FS7, but i won't because they save 4K 60fps for the even more expensive C500II that will cost 3.5x as much as the Sony. This is where my brand loyalty ends.



I think as consumers/professionals, we assess how many boxes that a product ticks off of our checklist (within some range of price and practicality).

_For me_, my camera body 'priorities seesaw' looks like this:
(I realize these are arbitrary batsh-- combinations, but hear me out. It's not to convince you to change your mind so much as make a point)

[list type=decimal]
[*]The ability to shoot in low light is far more important than having a smaller overall rig size.


[*]AF tuneability, reliability, speed and tracking is far more important than dynamic range.


[*]Having comprehensive options in reliable first-party lenses is far more important than the option to bolt 57 companies gear on to my mount.


[*]I want something sturdy and reliable more than I want something versatile.



[*]Tiebreaker = I want to keep the gear I already own much much much more than I want to improve my IQ by 5%.


[/list]

All of that adds up to: 

[list type=decimal]
[*]I should use a FF rig.
[*]I should use Canon or Nikon with a higher end AF system (or at least a non-budget one) -- or perhaps put more sternly, I should not use Sony
[*]I should use the Canon EF, Nikon F, or m43 mount
[*]I should use a non-articulating LCD
[/list]

The only rigs that satisfy all of those criteria simultaneously in my budget is a Canon 5D rig (5D3, 5DS, etc.) or the Nikon D810. The tiebreaker is the voice of reason, which is that we buy in to mounts and not specific camera bodies. So I'll stay with Canon, b/c that's where my glass is.
*
Why I wrote all this*: Clearly, your priorities are different, and it's clear that your preferences are being forced to straddle many product lines. That's a 100% legitimate beef with Canon. If you employ your own form of set theory to the problem, perhaps you'll come to the conclusion that you _shouldn't _be with Canon any longer, and it might be time to migrate. That might be the best play for you. Just make sure that you are not simply moving to the features you don't have and you also consider what Canon currently does well that you might be walking away from -- rent first and use only that new platform for a solid week of shooting and make sure you really can live without Canon's handling, AF, whatever.

- A


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Jul 14, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Try getting a shot that is...
> ...



If you are worried about it snapping off, then just keep it in locked to the body mode. I have yet to ever read a single story where someone doing that has ever had it get damaged where it would not have been damaged in case (such as the screen smashing straight down onto a pointy rock).

Pros could make use of swivel at least as much as amateurs, I don't see what a pro or not has to do with it.

Maybe in some extreme conditions it might be less weatherproof, but I'm not sure that has really even been shown to be the actual case.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 14, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Indeed Canon does plenty of excellent market research, unfortunately their conclusion is to squeeze as much money out of the consumers for as long as possible by splitting requested features into many different products, instead of thinking what the people really want. Many want to have high photo resolution and 4K alongside swivel screens, higher dynamic range etc at the same time in one product. As a Canon user, right now you would have to buy and carry around a 5DsR, a 760D and a C300II to do something similar you could with one Sony A7RII, while spending 6x as much money. Consumers should demand what's in the best interest of their own bank account, and not Canon's bank account. I personally would even buy a C300II although it's twice expensive as the Sony FS7, but i won't because they save 4K 60fps for the even more expensive C500II that will cost 3.5x as much as the Sony. This is where my brand loyalty ends.



What do you think Sony's conclusion is? Offer photographic equipment out of the good of their hearts for the advancement of the art?


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 14, 2015)

Its unrealistic for Canon to provide every option in the 5D MKIV, Sony doesnt, Nikon doesn't and nor does Panasonic etc. 
The human eye can detect around 20 stops of DR (some women with three cones its higher) if its healthy and young so clearly 12 stops as in most Canon cameras when many competitors sensors give 14 stops is a feature they need to catch up on. Note even with 14 stops Nikon users still use ND grads, NDs etc. The one area regardless of what features we all would like is noise and banding especially low level banding which even the VG sensor in the 6D suffers from, I dont see that in Sony sensors and given present tech is unforgiveable from Canon. 

All the other stuff comes down to ergonomics, shooting style, subject matter and personal preferences so one size will never fit all.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 15, 2015)

What do you think Sony's conclusion is? Offer photographic equipment out of the good of their hearts for the advancement of the art?
[/quote]

Sony's main goal of course is the same as Canon: maximizing profits. But their masterplan is totally different: they believe they sell more by giving the consumer the best product and exceeding expectations with features, like Canon unintentionally did with the video features of the 5D2. Just an hour ago a camera men told me many in his scene were waiting for the C300II, but since it is clear that it is twice as expensive with less features, they order a Sony FS7 now. Probably some would even pay twice as much if the C300II had 4k 60fps, but as Canon holds back that feature they pass. Canon might not see a decrease in sales today, but the loss in reputation will lead to that. Great body form factors, a great autofocus and a great brand name are not enough anymore in the year 2015!


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 15, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Sony's main goal of course is the same as Canon: maximizing profits. But their masterplan is totally different: they believe they sell more by giving the consumer the best product and exceeding expectations with features, like Canon unintentionally did with the video features of the 5D2. Just an hour ago a camera men told me many in his scene were waiting for the C300II, but since it is clear that it is twice as expensive with less features, they order a Sony FS7 now. Probably some would even pay twice as much if the C300II had 4k 60fps, but as Canon holds back that feature they pass. Canon might not see a decrease in sales today, but the loss in reputation will lead to that. Great body form factors, a great autofocus and a great brand name are not enough anymore in the year 2015!



Why do you keep removing the opening quote tag?

Sony is packing in as much as they can because they're desperate. The lower players always pack in more features to try to compete - look at the standard equipment on the Korean cars vs the established brands.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 15, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Sony's main goal of course is the same as Canon: maximizing profits. But their masterplan is totally different: they believe they sell more by giving the consumer the best product and exceeding expectations with features, like Canon unintentionally did with the video features of the 5D2. Just an hour ago a camera men told me many in his scene were waiting for the C300II, but since it is clear that it is twice as expensive with less features, they order a Sony FS7 now. Probably some would even pay twice as much if the C300II had 4k 60fps, but as Canon holds back that feature they pass. Canon might not see a decrease in sales today, but the loss in reputation will lead to that. Great body form factors, a great autofocus and a great brand name are not enough anymore in the year 2015!
> ...



It absolutely doesnt matter why Sony has better features, as long as it's in the consumers interest. If Canon only does think about their profits, consumers should do the same and only think about their advantages. Worshipping Canon without criticizing anything, while they are behind in many ways is not the right signal a potential user should send to Canon in these competitive times on all ends.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 15, 2015)

LonelyBoy said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Sony's main goal of course is the same as Canon: maximizing profits. But their masterplan is totally different: they believe they sell more by giving the consumer the best product and exceeding expectations with features, like Canon unintentionally did with the video features of the 5D2. Just an hour ago a camera men told me many in his scene were waiting for the C300II, but since it is clear that it is twice as expensive with less features, they order a Sony FS7 now. Probably some would even pay twice as much if the C300II had 4k 60fps, but as Canon holds back that feature they pass. Canon might not see a decrease in sales today, but the loss in reputation will lead to that. Great body form factors, a great autofocus and a great brand name are not enough anymore in the year 2015!
> ...


Check the news wires in 2012 Sony invested $ 1BN in its three CMOS wafer plants, in 2015 it annouced it would spend a further $ 890M to raise production from 60,000 wafers a month to 80,000 wafers a month. Some lower player.
We want Canon to continue to be a healthy competitive company, facts are facts Sony investment in CMOS technology far exceeds Canon the dollars it earns from Apple alone any company would crave. To compare Sony to a Korean car company is silly the F65 / F55 / F5 / FS7 trump Canon C500, C300/C300 MKII, C100 etc. Sure Sony has its issues, but it also has its strenghts exactly the same as Canon.


----------



## NancyP (Jul 15, 2015)

Tilting screen would be handy. I do a lot of near-ground macro, which means I am often on my elbows and knees.
Interchangeable screens! Why would the 6D have this and 5D3 not have this option? I like manual focus and using fast primes in MF.
Moveable spot metering - haven't had it before but this sounds like a great idea.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 15, 2015)

NancyP said:


> Interchangeable screens! Why would the 6D have this and 5D3 not have this option? I like manual focus and using fast primes in MF.



I think it was something to do with the LCD overlay, or transmissive LCD and cost. Neither the 7D nor the 5DIII had interchangeable screens, but the 7DII does. I'm sure the 5DIV will feature one.


----------



## dak723 (Jul 15, 2015)

scyrene said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > It's especially important to note that some of us users are mad about Canon not just only because they hold back technology intentionally while the products are expensive. Maybe that always has been the case, but historically it was never that obvious as it is now. As an owner of a Canon 5D2 in November 2008, would i have complained the same way? Not at all, the other manufacturers did hardly have anything better to offer, and Canon was on top and innovative by bringing the 1080p video mode to full frame. But right now in July 2015, all other manufacturers are more innovative and seem to care about consumers, and there's lots of attractive features offered to them. Canon should better be implementing any imaginable feature they have on their internal 5D4 possibility list, otherwise their DSLR branch could go the Nokia way.
> ...



Yes, it's really very simple. If you don't like what Canon is offering and you really want all the features that the new Sony has - buy the Sony. No one here will complain. Don't get mad at Canon. Don't try to convince all Canon users that they should get a Sony, too. Don't try to convince Canon users that the DSLR is dead. Don't worry about Canon's future or their marketing strategy. Just get the Sony. And let those of us who prefer Canon buy our new Canons or keep our old Canons. Why does it matter to you?

I have a very simple reason for buying from Canon. I like their IQ better. I have tried the Sony A7 and A7 II. I have tried the Olympus OM-D EM-1. Compared to the Canon 6D (and SL1) I like the Canon IQ more. I think the Canons expose more accurately. I like their color better and their tone curves. I have also found in the past that their cameras are well built and reliable (never needed a repair on 2 Canon film cameras and had the 300D for 9 years) so that is important, too. Don't need all the bells and whistles. Found Sony's 2 stop DR advantage made no difference in MY real world shooting. So if I am happy with Canon's offerings, please let me be. 

People who whine and complain in an era where cameras are far better than ever aren't getting my sympathy. And when you whine and complain, it tells us far more about you than it does about Canon.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 16, 2015)

dak723 said:


> scyrene said:
> 
> 
> > douglaurent said:
> ...



After reading your text i have realized what an asshole i have been for hinting towards proven facts. I can't remember that i have mentally or physically forced you to buy products of another brand, as I also don't like to buy products of another brand myself, which is why i am writing here in this forum. Anyway i am very sorry and will try to become a better and nicer person like you. I think you are right that in the future we all simply should accept any price, quality and feature that Canon has to offer in any of their products. Because any of their upcoming products is better than their old one, which is always more than we can ask for. Technically this whole forum is redundant, as we Canon users all simply just wait for new releases and work with whatever new improvements they have, regardless to the current standards of technology. Life will be much easier if you never question huge corporations, governments etc! Usually they will change to the better by themselves without any pressure, right?


----------



## dak723 (Jul 16, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> dak723 said:
> 
> 
> > scyrene said:
> ...



Sorry to see you that you didn't understand a word I wrote. Your sarcasm isn't appreciated especially since you sarcastically responded to points I didn't even make. I won't bother trying to explain further since you clearly aren't interested in dialogue or discussion. I hope you find a way to continue to enjoy photography. Good day to you.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 16, 2015)

Someone please should say in which month in history it was more justified than now to criticize Canon for behing behind in features or quality compared to competitors (or spreading good features into too many different expensive products for marketing and sales purposes). And when there has been a time with more Canon pros been willing to move to other brands? To return back to the topic of this forum thread, the specs of the upcoming 5D4 will really be an indicator how far Canon will push their game. It might be the last 5D version in this decade, and when they keep things as they are, they show that it's enough for them to sell photo cameras to 80s/90s traditional style photographers and have little interest in innovation. Their message to the world seems to be: photographers, filmmakers, amateurs and pros - PLEASE don't use the same camera! And PLEASE use your Canon camera for one purpose only - if you have a second or third shooting style interest, PLEASE by a second or third Canon camera! Now if i want to make a hires photo of scenes AND a 4K clip afterwards (for example for stock purposes), i just don't want to switch bodies and lenses 100x a day to do that. Right now i carry a 1DC and a 5DsR and an Atomos Shogun and spent 18.000 bucks for it, just to do the same what Sony users can do from next month on for 3000. I even would spend 6.000-12.000 for a similar solution by Canon, but it is just not in sight.


----------



## scyrene (Jul 16, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Someone please should say in which month in history it was more justified than now to criticize Canon for behing behind in features or quality compared to competitors (or spreading good features into too many different expensive products for marketing and sales purposes). And when there has been a time with more Canon pros been willing to move to other brands? To return back to the topic of this forum thread, the specs of the upcoming 5D4 will really be an indicator how far Canon will push their game. It might be the last 5D version in this decade, and when they keep things as they are, they show that it's enough for them to sell photo cameras to 80s/90s traditional style photographers and have little interest in innovation. Their message to the world seems to be: photographers, filmmakers, amateurs and pros - PLEASE don't use the same camera! And PLEASE use your Canon camera for one purpose only - if you have a second or third shooting style interest, PLEASE by a second or third Canon camera! Now if i want to make a hires photo of scenes AND a 4K clip afterwards (for example for stock purposes), i just don't want to switch bodies and lenses 100x a day to do that. Right now i carry a 1DC and a 5DsR and an Atomos Shogun and spent 18.000 bucks for it, just to do the same what Sony users can do from next month on for 3000. I even would spend 6.000-12.000 for a similar solution by Canon, but it is just not in sight.



Has it ever been the case that one camera could do everything? Given pretty much all stills cameras shoot video of some kind means they're more versatile in that regard than anything from the film era. I think the difference is, you're after *the best* of everything. Well I'm afraid no, nobody is offering, will offer, and perhaps *can* offer the *best* of every aspect of photography and videography in one device. It's a bit disingenuous to say Sony's newest thing will do everything. It'll do some things better, some things worse. It's not the Holy Grail.

I happen to love innovation. I only got into photography properly this decade, and it amazes me what's now possible. And I look forward to further innovation. But I *don't* think that there's been a fundamental shift in the last couple of years. My 5D3 is still a top notch camera, producing amazing images (at least, when I'm able to do it justice). Most of what I want to achieve is a matter of time, money, and effort - new lenses, post processing, other kit (astro gear), travel, getting up early, etc. But if I needed a feature that Canon didn't offer, I'd get the device I thought was best from whoever made it. I don't expect one company to provide everything I ever wanted.

Incidentally, it might make you feel better to imagine your venting here is somehow meant to help Canon, but I think they can work out what to do on their own (I imagine they look at sales, talk to professionals and distributors, and use focus groups). I doubt Sony releases products because someone shouted on a web forum, either. By all means, say what you want (everyone here can!), but my original point was I don't understand it. And that was aimed at a lot of people, not just you


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 16, 2015)

Probably anyone who is a 5D3 user should rent a Pentax 645z or D810 for a week and compare its dynamic range and noise levels. Or shoot a video with a GH4, A7S etc and watch it on a large 4K screen and compare it with a 5D video. In general spend time with a mirrorless camera and focus peaking or cameras with swivel screen, and then go back to a 5D3. Use all the functions that other manufacturers do provide, and Canon also can do, but just spreads over many expensive products or holds back.

So back to the question "Has it ever been the case that one camera could do everything?": No, but in 2015 we are close to it and closer than ever, and Canon is yet far away from it. And it seems without louder user feedback they might continue with their slow progress that theyve been used to in the past decades. Just now the media world has changed and especially pros are under much bigger pressure regarding workflow speed, versatility, price and quality. Some people can't wait until the 5D5 in the year 2020, when they would have needed the features in 2015 - when other manufactures have proven it's possible to have them ready.


----------



## TheJock (Jul 16, 2015)

Well I am the proud owner of a 5DIII as of today (it's my birthday) so I don't care anymore


----------



## candyman (Jul 16, 2015)

Stewart K said:


> Well I am the proud owner of a 5DIII as of today (it's my birthday) so I don't care anymore



Double congrats! Enjoy it


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 16, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Probably anyone who is a 5D3 user should rent a Pentax 645z or D810 for a week and compare its dynamic range and noise levels.
> ...



An example has been on page 3 of this thread, i attach it again. Exposure in the jpg was too nearly black. The sony sensor in the Pentax does recover everything with little noise, the 5DsR is just distorted. The D810 is not as good as the Pentax, but clearly better than the 5DsR or 5D3. With Canon we are stuck with the best lens lineup and the best body handling and AF, but a lot of the other features are not up to date for the price.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 16, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



Come on Sporgon, 

Take the imperceptible noise seriously, all serious photographers take the imperceptible aspects of IQ seriously :


----------



## scyrene (Jul 16, 2015)

Once again, we should bear in mind it is not fair to compare noise levels from different sensor sizes, as overall size makes such a huge difference. But in any case we're all talking at cross purposes anyway. We _all_ know and concede the noise and DR differences exist (at base ISO yadda yadda) but some people remain to be convinced how crucial that is.

Incidentally I'd love a 645z. But a) it's too expensive for me and b) there are no super telephoto lenses that would give me the reach I need on medium format. Everything is a compromise.

PS the idea that (non-Canon) cameras are getting closer to doing everything perfectly is untrue. Because as they introduce features like 4K, so the top end specialist video cameras offer better bitrates and even higher resolutions. The goalposts keep moving.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 16, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> Sporgon said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Just nobody tell dilbert the world's spinning else he'll feel dizzy and disorientated. 

Or maybe that's where the problem comes from.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 16, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Sporgon said:
> ...



It doesn't matter - "the noise is there". You're supposed to trust that the noise is there, hidden by the signal, and the fact that it exists means the image is ruined.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 16, 2015)

If you would do hundreds of tests under any circumstance and with any exposure, you will see that a 5D3 or 5DsR has far less dynamic range than a Pentax 645z, but also less than a D810 on both ends, shadows and brightness. And when blacks are pushed, the noise of Canon is just higher and not too far away to the levels of a GH4 micro four thirds camera. In a price range i would say its okay to pay 8000 for a Pentax and 3000 for a Nikon, but the Canon quality concerning dynamic range and noise is worth only 1500. For all like me who want to work with a Canon camera for many good reasons, that's just a sad fact. So on one side Canon has limited raw image qualities that require long exposure times and stacking to be on the same level as shooters of other brands in certain circumstances, on the other hand unfortunately Canon is also behind in features like 4K video, focus peaking, swivel screen and so on. I know for a manufacturer it is difficult, because if you give away all innovations over night - what innovative arguments will you have in future models and coming years? But the world and its pressure on innovations, prices etc is like it is, because its a globalized market. And the same way that pro photographers, journalists or musicians are under pressure with decreasing budgets and increasing service demands, Canon needs to compete as well and come up with more than they would like to in their ideal world.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jul 16, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> If you would do hundreds of tests under any circumstance and with any exposure, you will see that a 5D3 or 5DsR has far less dynamic range than a Pentax 645z, but also less than a D810 on *both ends*, shadows and brightness. And when blacks are pushed, the noise of Canon is just higher and not too far away to the levels of a GH4 micro four thirds camera. In a price range i would say its okay to pay 8000 for a Pentax and 3000 for a Nikon, but the Canon quality concerning dynamic range and noise is worth only 1500. For all like me who want to work with a Canon camera for many good reasons, that's just a sad fact. So on one side Canon has limited raw image qualities that require long exposure times and stacking to be on the same level as shooters of other brands in certain circumstances, on the other hand unfortunately Canon is also behind in features like 4K video, focus peaking, swivel screen and so on. I know for a manufacturer it is difficult, because if you give away all innovations over night - what innovative arguments will you have in future models and coming years? But the world and its pressure on innovations, prices etc is like it is, because its a globalized market. And the same way that pro photographers, journalists or musicians are under pressure with decreasing budgets and increasing service demands, Canon needs to compete as well and come up with more than they would like to in their ideal world.



That has never been in question.

That is simply not true. The highlights are technically the same, actually they are often less forgiving with Nikon files when relying on metered exposure. The midtone exposure is also the same with all 14 bit files, it is just the ability to lift shadows that is different, some find that more useful than others.


----------



## bvukich (Jul 16, 2015)

*Are you guys still fighting about DR? This is why I don't bother coming here anymore. Always the same old arguments, rehashed ad nauseam. 

I don't know or care, how or why you choose a camera. It doesn't validate my choices to know you concur, just like it doesn't invalidate my choices to know you don't. 

Grow up. Go buy a camera, any one, IT LITERALLY DOESN'T F-ING MATTER; and take some pictures.*


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 16, 2015)

bvukich said:


> *Are you guys still fighting about DR? This is why I don't bother coming here anymore. Always the same old arguments, rehashed ad nauseam.
> 
> I don't know or care, how or why you choose a camera. It doesn't validate my choices to know you concur, just like it doesn't invalidate my choices to know you don't.
> 
> Grow up. Go buy a camera, any one, IT LITERALLY DOESN'T F-ING MATTER; and take some pictures.*



What a pathetic post.

CR has thousands of visitors. One would assume that most are Canon users and many will have little experience with other systems. The continual stream of people who use CR as a platform to try and make Canon users feel that their equipment is in some way inferior to the rest requires refuting. 

Anyway, with a response from like that from someone who I believe is a CR moderator it's time for CR and myself to part company.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 16, 2015)

In a democracy debate whether in agreement or not is healthy lets just rejoice the fact we can beg to differ and our views are not sensored. 
Politeness however costs nothing and the danger with the internet is hiding behind a screen and getting personal we all need to take onboard the fact that we dont always agree but hope to agree on some things and that whether its Canon or any other manufacturer constructive debate good or bad is the way products have improved and moved forwards for the benefit of everyone.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jul 16, 2015)

bvukich said:


> *Are you guys still fighting about DR? This is why I don't bother coming here anymore. Always the same old arguments, rehashed ad nauseam.
> 
> I don't know or care, how or why you choose a camera. It doesn't validate my choices to know you concur, just like it doesn't invalidate my choices to know you don't.
> 
> Grow up. Go buy a camera, any one, IT LITERALLY DOESN'T F-ING MATTER; and take some pictures.*


Gentlemen, please.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 16, 2015)

privatebydesign said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > If you would do hundreds of tests under any circumstance and with any exposure, you will see that a 5D3 or 5DsR has far less dynamic range than a Pentax 645z, but also less than a D810 on *both ends*, shadows and brightness. And when blacks are pushed, the noise of Canon is just higher and not too far away to the levels of a GH4 micro four thirds camera. In a price range i would say its okay to pay 8000 for a Pentax and 3000 for a Nikon, but the Canon quality concerning dynamic range and noise is worth only 1500. For all like me who want to work with a Canon camera for many good reasons, that's just a sad fact. So on one side Canon has limited raw image qualities that require long exposure times and stacking to be on the same level as shooters of other brands in certain circumstances, on the other hand unfortunately Canon is also behind in features like 4K video, focus peaking, swivel screen and so on. I know for a manufacturer it is difficult, because if you give away all innovations over night - what innovative arguments will you have in future models and coming years? But the world and its pressure on innovations, prices etc is like it is, because its a globalized market. And the same way that pro photographers, journalists or musicians are under pressure with decreasing budgets and increasing service demands, Canon needs to compete as well and come up with more than they would like to in their ideal world.
> ...



Yes, the highlights are not such a mess like the shadows, but the whole comparison starts with the shocking fact that Nikon cameras are app. one stop brighter than Canon cameras. Do mount any exact same lens that has a nikon mount (like an Otus) on a camera of both systems, and you will see under the same f-stop and iso settings, the Nikon images are much brighter. So technically you would have to set ISO of Canon cameras higher to get a real equal result, which then means the highlights could clip sooner. There are a lot of phenomenons you can see when you compare that nobody is talking about, like Zeiss lenses who do seem to have less transmission than other brands lenses. An Otus 55 seems to be as bright at f1.4 as a Sigma 501/1.4 at f2. Now stopped down to f2, the Sigma has nearly equalized most of the technical advantages the Otus had when you only compare both lenses wide open. It absolutely makes sense to compare products of all brands, and not just buy one expensive product and then hope and insist it is the best for as long as you personally own it.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 16, 2015)

Grow up. Go buy a camera, any one, IT LITERALLY DOESN'T F-ING MATTER; and take some pictures.[/b][/size][/color]
[/quote]

This website is called "Canon Rumors", not "Platform for Canon owners who are 100% happy the way things are and only want to shoot on the same level forever with the equipment they have". Canon Rumors is - as far as I could experience it so far - about future developments and new insights on existing products. This is why Canon users spend time on this forum, so they can improve their setups or techniques or learn more in general. I don't see that any Nikon fanboys or haters are wasting time on this platform. As a Canon owner of 100+ products and someone who prefers to work with Canon bodies and the Canon look, it is my personal sole interest to motivate Canon to implement features and qualities that other manufacturers or they themselve already have, for existing high or even premium prices. Right now before the release of a 5D4, 1DX2, C300II it is a historical turning point to remind Canon of the urgency to wake up. All the Canon consumers who are perfectly happy with their 5D3 also might not be the first buyers of a 5D4. It's the people who want and need more. And those consumers do see what features and qualities are possible now. This is why this is also no thread about dynamic range or noise in particular. It's a all about what happens in a 5D4, as this determines the positioning of all other future Canon photo products and their features, maybe even until the end of this decade.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 16, 2015)

It's not features, plural. It's feature, singular. It's constantly the low ISO DR complaint. That is the absolute singular point that never ends. Those precious 2 stops that go away quickly that quite frankly matter little to others other than gear heads. Never mind the AF, lenses, high ISO performance, EF mount, speedlites, CPS service, none of that. It's always about that darn low ISO DR. Not to mention the comparison photos that most people got wrong. Remember the cave photo about a year ago or so? I remember people bitching about lack of resolution when the D800 was released. Oh good times.


----------



## Dylan777 (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Grow up. Go buy a camera, any one, IT LITERALLY DOESN'T F-ING MATTER; and take some pictures.[/b][/size][/color]



This website is called "Canon Rumors", not "Platform for Canon owners who are 100% happy the way things are and only want to shoot on the same level forever with the equipment they have". Canon Rumors is - as far as I could experience it so far - about future developments and new insights on existing products. This is why Canon users spend time on this forum, so they can improve their setups or techniques or learn more in general. I don't see that any Nikon fanboys or haters are wasting time on this platform. As a Canon owner of 100+ products and someone who prefers to work with Canon bodies and the Canon look, it is my personal sole interest to motivate Canon to implement features and qualities that other manufacturers or they themselve already have, for existing high or even premium prices. Right now before the release of a 5D4, 1DX2, C300II it is a historical turning point to remind Canon of the urgency to wake up. All the Canon consumers who are perfectly happy with their 5D3 also might not be the first buyers of a 5D4. It's the people who want and need more. And those consumers do see what features and qualities are possible now. This is why this is also no thread about dynamic range or noise in particular. It's a all about what happens in a 5D4, as this determines the positioning of all other future Canon photo products and their features, maybe even until the end of this decade.
[/quote]

Canon already handcuffed many Canon shooters with L lenses. Do you really think CR member voices would make any difference in their up coming releases?


----------



## raptor3x (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Yes, the highlights are not such a mess like the shadows, but the whole comparison starts with the shocking fact that Nikon cameras are app. one stop brighter than Canon cameras. Do mount any exact same lens that has a nikon mount (like an Otus) on a camera of both systems, and you will see under the same f-stop and iso settings, the Nikon images are much brighter. So technically you would have to set ISO of Canon cameras higher to get a real equal result, which then means the highlights could clip sooner.



Are you accustomed to just going around lying without getting called on it? This is complete nonsense and completely eliminates any credibility you might have.



douglaurent said:


> There are a lot of phenomenons you can see when you compare that nobody is talking about, like Zeiss lenses who do seem to have less transmission than other brands lenses. An Otus 55 seems to be as bright at f1.4 as a Sigma 501/1.4 at f2. Now stopped down to f2, the Sigma has nearly equalized most of the technical advantages the Otus had when you only compare both lenses wide open. It absolutely makes sense to compare products of all brands, and not just buy one expensive product and then hope and insist it is the best for as long as you personally own it.



That's because, based on this post, it seems that literally none of what you say is true. The Otus has a t-stop of t/1.5 while the Sigma 50 1.4 Art has a t-stop of f/1.7.


----------



## scottkinfw (Jul 17, 2015)

And yet you need to write here to get validated?



Sporgon said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > *Are you guys still fighting about DR? This is why I don't bother coming here anymore. Always the same old arguments, rehashed ad nauseam.
> ...


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 17, 2015)

raptor3x said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, the highlights are not such a mess like the shadows, but the whole comparison starts with the shocking fact that Nikon cameras are app. one stop brighter than Canon cameras. Do mount any exact same lens that has a nikon mount (like an Otus) on a camera of both systems, and you will see under the same f-stop and iso settings, the Nikon images are much brighter. So technically you would have to set ISO of Canon cameras higher to get a real equal result, which then means the highlights could clip sooner.
> ...



Maybe you should test all this on your own, before you call other people a liar. I own 30 cameras of all brands and 180 of the best lenses of all brands available and do test them many times against each other since years. My eyes are lasered and i have 13x 4K screens of all sizes and of all top reference brands to watch the results. All my Zeiss lenses including the CP.2 cinema primes have a darker transmission than you would expect. Any Canon body did deliver darker results with the same parameters than a Nikon body. No clue why nobody writes about it - maybe because nobody did test it, and the ones who test it brighten up images so you could compare them better, as lens tests are usually not about comparing the overall brightness of camera systems. Just rent a 5D3, D810, Otus 55 and Sigma 50/1.4 and see yourself. Maybe i just had bought defect copies of all and am wrong indeed? That would be good news for me. I am the last person on this planet that is happy that my 12.000 euro 1DC, 4.000 euro 5DsR and my 4.000 euro Otus have minor weaknesses in performance they should not have.


----------



## unfocused (Jul 17, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > *Are you guys still fighting about DR? This is why I don't bother coming here anymore. Always the same old arguments, rehashed ad nauseam.
> ...



And once again, Canon rumors drives away a knowledgeable. rational professional.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> An example has been on page 3 of this thread, i attach it again. Exposure in the jpg was too nearly black. The sony sensor in the Pentax does recover everything with little noise...



Thanks for this great example:






I've seen examples where the D810/a7R can take a severely underexposed scene and produce a flat, front-lit, low contrast, boring image. But the Pentax 645Z can do that _at night_! 

:


----------



## sanj (Jul 17, 2015)

sanj said:


> bvukich said:
> 
> 
> > *Are you guys still fighting about DR? This is why I don't bother coming here anymore. Always the same old arguments, rehashed ad nauseam.
> ...


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 17, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > An example has been on page 3 of this thread, i attach it again. Exposure in the jpg was too nearly black. The sony sensor in the Pentax does recover everything with little noise...
> ...



You don't seem to understand it. This scene is nearly pure black in the jpg, while being ISO100. It shows that in the shadows dynamic range is cut, and whatever you push in the Canon from what's left is pretty noisy and destroyed, while you can bring the Pentax to a usable level. The effect of such limitations on Canon DSLRs is the same when editing any raw file of any exposure that includes shadows that need to be boosted. It is 3 classes behind the Pentax and 1 class behind Nikon. In dark environments the image quality of a 5DsR is closer to the limited level of a GH4, than to a D810. I say that while i own and keep the 5DsR. Aside from the 1DC, everything Canon has released since 2008 (including the video mode) feels as if there has not been too much development. It's also a bit too much of Sony to come up with a new model of each series each and every year, but at least you constantly can see improvement. With Canon it feels as if this only happens every 4 years. This is why the next 5D4 needs to be a huge step, so it is not even further behind its competitors until the year 2020, when they release the 5D5.


----------



## Maximilian (Jul 17, 2015)

sanj said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > bvukich said:
> ...


+1 to sanj, thank you for putting it clear
and 
+1 to "Sporgon buddy please don't go."

and bvukich, 
then I'll have to ask you what has happened here. Did you have a bad day?
Of course that never ending DR discussion is tiring. But it is an issue nobody can deny.
Of course it is not that important as some think and of course it takes too much space here. 

But please:
All mods of CR should be aware that such a performance is not good for anybody.
And it is discrediting your position in any way you could think about. 

Moderator => moderare = to temper, to regulate, to put sb. in their place
but in a calm, polite, serious and respectful way

Thank you very much.


----------



## romanr74 (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Yes, the highlights are not such a mess like the shadows, but the whole comparison starts with the shocking fact that Nikon cameras are app. one stop brighter than Canon cameras.



Holy, now I'm really really shocked...


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> You don't seem to understand it. This scene is nearly pure black in the jpg, while being ISO100.



Oh, I understand quite well, thanks. Some sensors are certainly better than others when you egregiously f-up your exposure. :


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> privatebydesign said:
> 
> 
> > douglaurent said:
> ...


Having witnessed how Zeiss test their lenses including on F Stop / T Stop machine I would say in that typical Germanic way they strive to be accurate, very accurate.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 17, 2015)

dilbert said:


> bdunbar79 said:
> 
> 
> > It's not features, plural. It's feature, singular. It's constantly the low ISO DR complaint. That is the absolute singular point that never ends. Those precious 2 stops that go away quickly that quite frankly matter little to others other than gear heads. Never mind the AF, lenses, high ISO performance, EF mount, speedlites, CPS service, none of that. It's always about that darn low ISO DR.
> ...



Who cares? Hasn't hurt my photography. I routinely shoot sports during the middle of the day and I've never had a problem. Could I use more DR? Sure, but nobody cares or notices. And the minute I raise ISO to say, 400, most of the DR is gone anyways. You're so fixated on just a very, very small part of the sensor tech.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 17, 2015)

Having witnessed how Zeiss test their lenses including on F Stop / T Stop machine I would say in that typical Germanic way they strive to be accurate, very accurate.
[/quote]
Yes, Zeiss lenses are great performers and have little sample variation, but they also have their downsides that people who don't own them don't see, or people who own them ignore (Disclaimer: I own the whole top lineup myself). Most Zeiss lenses for example are not to useful for landscape photography, as their focus infinity already starts at around 50 meters (like their 15/.28), while with Canon lenses you can easily distinguish and adjust the exact focus point among 50, 250, 500 or 1000 meters. Autofocus users and users who stop down or don't have a large monitor don't realize this Zeiss limitation, but it's a fact and i have it even confirmed in written form by Zeiss. 

In general, all these DXO Mark values might also be correct based on their test system, but real world shows different results like regarding transmission/brightness. Example: DXO Mark lists the Red Dragon sensor as best performer. I own 2 Red Epic Dragon and know that the 5D3 will definitely deliver better and less noisy results after raw processing, which is no wonder as a Canon raw file is much larger than a Red raw frame. The cool thing about the Red is to have 100 frames a second in 6K, but the Canon image potential is way ahead, which makes the DXO Mark numbers pretty useless again. 

Canon also has many fields where they outperfom competitors. Stabilized Canon lenses for example are a pleasure on MFT cameras like the GH4 when it comes to stabilization, which is much better than the Lumix' own system. I think if Canon wants to, they could be ahead of any competitor, and the forthcoming Canon expo will show what they are capable of (but unfortunately spread over 5-10 years).

Knowing this, the lack of bringing the quality into the products is what can make you angry as a customer. In the 5DsR they have finally built in an internal timelapse timer feature. But is it useful like in the competitors menus, where you can set a start time and a 4-digit number of images, so you don't have to wake up at night twice to start and stop your timelapse? No, Canon has implemented a 2(!) digit number only of photos your timelapse can do automatically, without a dedicated start time - which means you still need external equipment to do it right.

Same with the world premiere of the video autofocus function in the 5DsR, which lets even all non-STM lenses focus in video - other manufacturers would have cherished it, but Canon wants to avoid that anybody who is doing video buys a 5DsR and instead buys a second and more expensive dedicated video product. All this makes you think that Canon is not really interested in you as a customer at all, at least not like the feeling you can have with Sony or Panasonic at the moment.


----------



## K (Jul 17, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > An example has been on page 3 of this thread, i attach it again. Exposure in the jpg was too nearly black. The sony sensor in the Pentax does recover everything with little noise...
> ...




This is the PERFECT example to illustrate the point. While the shadow recovery of the Sony sensors is amazing, past a certain point that ability is wasted and useless since the image looks like crap anyway.

This is the point I made in several rants about Exmor in the past. Sure, doing a 3, 4 or 5 stop push from ISO 100 is possible, but the end result is NOT a usable photo. At least not if you're into quality photography. It's mostly an exercise in technical capabilities, rather than producing good photos.

I certainly am not saying that Exmor isn't better than Canon in this regard. It certainly is. Canon will introduce all kinds of noise and garbage when trying those same extremes. Sony has more reach in this regard.

For practical shadow lifting, we're talking 1 or 2 stops at most. While the Sony is still better than Canon even at the minimal adjustments, Canon does fine lifting shadows within the practical range and still produces top quality. The difference is very, very minor to the point of it not being discussion worthy.

This is why the Sonikon fanatics only discuss huge exposure adjustments. They champion this single, impractical "feature" as their one-up to Canon.


What the Exmorites don't understand is, there's only so much you can bump the shadows before the image as a whole degrades in quality. You can't lift exposure more than a little before you've lost too much color and quality to be considered upper level IQ.

Exmored photos either look:

FLAT

or 

FAKE

Flat if the whole exposure was lifted too much
Fake if the shadows were lifted too much.


While at times it is cool to see all detail in the photo in all the range, in most photos this isn't visually appealing. Exmoring a photo isn't the same quality result as doing a good job of HDR with lots of careful post-processing selections. And most photography doesn't need HDR or shadow lifting. 

To create depth, structure, and good feel - you need to show that range. This is what gives an image that pop. Look at top portrait pros. They're not scared of having parts of their image in shadow. Having totally dark areas with no detail isn't always a bad thing.

As a photographer, you need to SCULPT the subject with light. 

Exmoring it flattens it out. Photos that have been Exmored look like bad print outs from a poor inkjet.



Bottom line, the whole appeal of the Exmor exposure lift is that it functions as a crutch for thousands of "natural light" Nikon shooters who can't expose correctly because they listen to and are convinced by all the web-gurus that if they don't use manual exclusively, they are newbies. Most are "natural light" not because this is the style they pursue, but because they are amateurs and haven't learned the real art of lighting, nor busted out the cash for good lighting gear.


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 17, 2015)

Maximilian said:


> sanj said:
> 
> 
> > sanj said:
> ...



Many thanks Guys. Sanj; you tell him ! ;D

As I said on another thread, I wouldn't leave CR as the cool guys & girls here easily outnumber the bad.

Bvukich: you abused your position as an administrator. In fact with that post I don't think you are fit to be one.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jul 17, 2015)

ok, so, getting pissed! Yup. Been mostly reading and not posting because I am busy but now, let the rant rant!

I keep seeing comments like, canon is just milking us for the $$$$ with incremental modest updates in gear. But somehow Sony/nikon is not? Comments like this


douglaurent said:


> All this makes you think that Canon is not really interested in you as a customer at all, at least not like the feeling you can have with Sony or Panasonic at the moment.



Lets think about it ---

So 2012 to now - In the FF segment canon has released the 1dx, the 5d3, the 6d and the 5ds/5dsr. that's 5 bodies, and it took them about 3 years to add the 5ds/r's on. 

Now lets look at sony, they started in 2013 and they've put out the A7, A7r, A7s, a72 (refresh of the original after only a year on the market), and now the A7r2 (refresh of the original after only 2 years on the market). Similar to canon, in that it's 5 bodies, but the refresh time is so short that i just don't understand how any of you can make the claim that canon is milking us, looks moe like sony is milking folks with rapid refreshes of their bodies.

Now lets look at nikon -- 2012 they put out the d4, d800, d800e and the d600. A year later they release the d610 (quick refresh). A year later comes the d810, d750, and the d4s. That's 8 camera bodies in the same time period canon releases 5. Most of the nikon releases were - rapid refreshes of already existing products. 

So again I ask, how is canon milking us but nikon especially isn't? Seems to me more like nikon is using it's customer base to beta test their products at a premium price. Sony too, but a little less than nikon (just thinking product life cycles) - at least sony has a more reasonable # of bodies to market in this 4 year window.

But of course, canon is evil and milking us...i means, the 5d3 came out in 2012 and 3.5 years later they tempt you with the 5ds - with the 5d4 on the way but it will be a full 4 years since the 5d3 came on the scene. 

If canon was nikon, we'd have a 5d3 in 2012, a 5d3.2 in 2013, a 5dx in 2014 --- and oh yeah, a 6.5d followed by a 75d too. Seriously, would you rather have that? do nikon users have that much disposable cash on hand to buy new bodies every 1.5 years????

rant done....but


neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > An example has been on page 3 of this thread, i attach it again. Exposure in the jpg was too nearly black. The sony sensor in the Pentax does recover everything with little noise...
> ...



Why? Why would either of these 2 pictures be taken, and why would anyone consider that pentak image usable? Just because you can do a thing that doesn't mean you should do a thing.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 17, 2015)

I think this thread can probably end here. The very very small chance that this discussion helps to lead to some improvements in a 5D4 won't become bigger. And all those Canon users who defend their brand even to a point where they like a completely destroyed Canon image result better than a clean result of a competitor for sure won't write anything to learn from either. In fact I don't even understand why people read a thread about 5D4 specs, when they already have a 5D3 which is perfect for them and doesn't seem to need any improvements. You might have started to read the wrong thread, if you don't care whatever improvements a 5D4 or other future Canon cameras could or should have.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> I think this thread can probably end here. The very very small chance that this discussion helps to lead to some improvements in a 5D4 won't become bigger. And all those Canon users who defend their brand even to a point where they like a completely destroyed Canon image result better than a clean result of a competitor for sure won't write anything to learn from either. In fact I don't even understand why people read a thread about 5D4 specs, when they already have a 5D3 which is perfect for them and doesn't seem to need any improvements. You might have started to read the wrong thread, if you don't care whatever improvements a 5D4 or other future Canon cameras could or should have.



Perhaps you chose to read and respond to the wrong thread. This is a discussion about a future *camera*, the 5D Mark IV, and there are all sorts of ways in which it could be an improvement over the 5DIII. Areas like metering, frame rate and buffer, AF system, direct RF flash triggering, etc. 

Those who perseverate on low ISO DR should perhaps try to understand that there is more to a camera than a bare silicon sensor used only at base ISO, and those who believe that a 5-stop exposure push is the sine qua non of photography should perhaps recognize that they are in the minority...a very minor minority.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> I think this thread can probably end here. The very very small chance that this discussion helps to lead to some improvements in a 5D4 won't become bigger. And all those Canon users who defend their brand even to a point where they like a completely destroyed Canon image result better than a clean result of a competitor for sure won't write anything to learn from either. In fact I don't even understand why people read a thread about 5D4 specs, when they already have a 5D3 which is perfect for them and doesn't seem to need any improvements. You might have started to read the wrong thread, if you don't care whatever improvements a 5D4 or other future Canon cameras could or should have.



Wow, Hyperbole maybe?

For one - we're close enough to release date that a bunch of forum chatter won't be making much a difference.

For 2 - If your using that night shot as your benchmark - then I don't know how you don't see that both images are horrid and unusable. When I am shooting I don't look at a scene and say, OK, at ISO 100, and f8, I need to have my tripod and expose at 2 seconds that is correct exposure - sorry, I just don't go the other way - screw the tripod I'm just gonna shoot it 1/50th and destroy the image by wildly pushing the darks 5 stops. (correct my math error here!!!!) 

Again, most of us are reasonable and would never say no to more DR, we're just not sold on the idea that DR is everything!!!!!

Point #3 - you do realize that your bashing a camera that doesn't even exist yet! the 5d4 only exists in the land of rumor. It could very well be an amazing camera but as of now no one really knows what form it will take. I'm not too concerned because ----- I am actually still pretty damn happy with the 5d3 and I have been enjoying my 5ds rental. Then again, I shoot weddings so a ton of DR at ISO 100-800 doesn't make or break any decision for me as the vast majority of my shooting is at ISO 1000-4000. Here's my breakdown lol...In lightroom currently meta filtering ----for me total images between iso 800-4000 is 13,852- and for ISO 100-800 we have 12,412. If I streamline this down to just weddings though the ratio changes up a bit. Either way, my work runs across the ISO spectrum so freaking out about DR at such a small segment of the full range of the camera. Your work is obviously different, and has different needs and for you - canon probably isn't meeting those needs ----

and you know what?

That's fine! Each system has it's strengths and has it's advantages, and if system A doesn't work for you, then by all means move to system B or C or D... nothing stopping you.

The thing us reasonable folks get pissed with is this idea that your shooting needs must be all of our shooting needs and if you don't agree then you all must be just total batsh!t crazy/brainwashed/fanbois/etc...


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 17, 2015)

neuroanatomist said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > An example has been on page 3 of this thread, i attach it again. Exposure in the jpg was too nearly black. The sony sensor in the Pentax does recover everything with little noise...
> ...



I thought about raising this point yesterday before realizing the Exmor Crusaders would say that it wasn't about the images themselves; images don't matter, what matters is that the Exmor pulled the image to super-bright. Quality doesn't matter.

I like the 5DSr image far more.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Right now before the release of a 5D4, 1DX2, C300II it is a historical turning point to remind Canon of the urgency to wake up.



Are you doing this? Right now you're just complaining on CR. What would actually count would be selling your Canon gear, not buying more, and writing a letter to Canon USA (and ideally Canon Japan) explaining what you did, and why, and how much you spent elsewhere because of it. Bitching on CR is not reminding Canon of anything.


----------



## raptor3x (Jul 17, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Maybe you should test all this on your own, before you call other people a liar. I own 30 cameras of all brands and 180 of the best lenses of all brands available and do test them many times against each other since years. My eyes are lasered and i have 13x 4K screens of all sizes and of all top reference brands to watch the results. All my Zeiss lenses including the CP.2 cinema primes have a darker transmission than you would expect. Any Canon body did deliver darker results with the same parameters than a Nikon body. No clue why nobody writes about it - maybe because nobody did test it, and the ones who test it brighten up images so you could compare them better, as lens tests are usually not about comparing the overall brightness of camera systems. Just rent a 5D3, D810, Otus 55 and Sigma 50/1.4 and see yourself. Maybe i just had bought defect copies of all and am wrong indeed? That would be good news for me. I am the last person on this planet that is happy that my 12.000 euro 1DC, 4.000 euro 5DsR and my 4.000 euro Otus have minor weaknesses in performance they should not have.



You know, I was probably wrong to imply you're intentionally lying as I'm forgetting Hanlon's razor, my apologies. With that said, you're still flat out wrong about Canon and Nikon being different by a stop at the same ISO. The fact that you have access to so much equipment just goes to show that you don't seem to be capable of conducting an experiment. I don't have any Nikon bodies on hand, but as the A7R has the same sensor as the D800 it should suffice. Below we have a 1DX and A7R both using the 70-200ii @ 200mm with both shot at 1/200s | f/2.8 | ISO 100.






What a shock, identical brightness given identical exposure. Maybe it happens at high ISO?






Still no difference, if anything the histogram of the Canon shows a bit *more* exposure than the Sony. Obviously Sony must be putting a 1-stop neutral density filter in their own sensor stacks to be more fair to Canon. I mean, if you're seeing a one stop difference that nobody else is seeing, then obviously everybody else must be keeping hushhush and it couldn't be that you're the one screwing up your measurements, right?


----------



## Sporgon (Jul 17, 2015)

raptor3x said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe you should test all this on your own, before you call other people a liar. I own 30 cameras of all brands and 180 of the best lenses of all brands available and do test them many times against each other since years. My eyes are lasered and i have 13x 4K screens of all sizes and of all top reference brands to watch the results. All my Zeiss lenses including the CP.2 cinema primes have a darker transmission than you would expect. Any Canon body did deliver darker results with the same parameters than a Nikon body. No clue why nobody writes about it - maybe because nobody did test it, and the ones who test it brighten up images so you could compare them better, as lens tests are usually not about comparing the overall brightness of camera systems. Just rent a 5D3, D810, Otus 55 and Sigma 50/1.4 and see yourself. Maybe i just had bought defect copies of all and am wrong indeed? That would be good news for me. I am the last person on this planet that is happy that my 12.000 euro 1DC, 4.000 euro 5DsR and my 4.000 euro Otus have minor weaknesses in performance they should not have.
> ...



Nice example, and a point that I have tried to make in the past: with (even moderately) accurate exposure there is no difference in IQ.

Your comparison is also a very good example of the typical difference off camera; the Canon has more 'brio' in it, and makes a short cut to the correct tonal response that (most of us) want in our pictures. Chuck on the 5Ds thread showed his wedding reception shots and said one of them was straight off camera. To a working pro this makes such a difference when dealing with hundreds of images from an event.


----------



## Chuck Alaimo (Jul 17, 2015)

Sporgon said:


> raptor3x said:
> 
> 
> > douglaurent said:
> ...



TY Sporgon, here is another straight out of camera then 2 crops crop ---- this is from the pregame section of the event, but was in a darker part oft he room for this... 35mm sigma art @ 2.8 (going lower would have been too thin on DOF) ISO 3200, 1/80th. 

If the 5d4 has any of the goodies from the 5ds in terms of IQ then the 5d4 will be a very good camera. 

I do like the 5ds though. Seriously considering adding it.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 18, 2015)

The thing us reasonable folks get pissed with is this idea that your shooting needs must be all of our shooting needs and if you don't agree then you all must be just total batsh!t crazy/brainwashed/fanbois/etc... 
[/quote]

My shooting needs consist of ALL techniques under all circumstances, which makes it very broad and targets parts of anybody's shooting needs. Canon, Sony, Panasonic etc have a certain product feature release history in the last 3 years that implies it might go on like this with a 5D4 and other Canon products, which implies you need to spend much more money on Canon and will need to carry around more gear to be able to get the same results with Canon gear, compared to other manufacturers. Anybody who is blind for these facts is welcome to do so. It is not about dynamic range or a certain test picture, it's all about Canon's marketing strategies and future impacts for us Canon users in daily real world. When you carry around your new 5D4, maybe at some point until the year 2020 you will realize what i meant.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 18, 2015)

raptor3x said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe you should test all this on your own, before you call other people a liar. I own 30 cameras of all brands and 180 of the best lenses of all brands available and do test them many times against each other since years. My eyes are lasered and i have 13x 4K screens of all sizes and of all top reference brands to watch the results. All my Zeiss lenses including the CP.2 cinema primes have a darker transmission than you would expect. Any Canon body did deliver darker results with the same parameters than a Nikon body. No clue why nobody writes about it - maybe because nobody did test it, and the ones who test it brighten up images so you could compare them better, as lens tests are usually not about comparing the overall brightness of camera systems. Just rent a 5D3, D810, Otus 55 and Sigma 50/1.4 and see yourself. Maybe i just had bought defect copies of all and am wrong indeed? That would be good news for me. I am the last person on this planet that is happy that my 12.000 euro 1DC, 4.000 euro 5DsR and my 4.000 euro Otus have minor weaknesses in performance they should not have.
> ...



HELP!!! My theory is that the same lens under the same settings is brighter on Nikon bodies than on Canon bodies, and you prove me wrong because you compare a Canon body with a Sony body? Obviously the difference i mean will come through different internal ISO ratings or processing by Nikon, and not necessarily the sensor - i said that before. Now as a modern Sony sensor has less noise and dynamic range than a current Canon sensor, any way you look at it won't make Canon a winner here. I wish it would be the other way around!


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 18, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> The thing us reasonable folks get pissed with is this idea that your shooting needs must be all of our shooting needs and if you don't agree then you all must be just total batsh!t crazy/brainwashed/fanbois/etc...



My shooting needs consist of ALL techniques under all circumstances, which makes it very broad and targets parts of anybody's shooting needs. Canon, Sony, Panasonic etc have a certain product feature release history in the last 3 years that implies it might go on like this with a 5D4 and other Canon products, which implies you need to spend much more money on Canon and will need to carry around more gear to be able to get the same results with Canon gear, compared to other manufacturers. Anybody who is blind for these facts is welcome to do so. It is not about dynamic range or a certain test picture, it's all about Canon's marketing strategies and future impacts for us Canon users in daily real world. When you carry around your new 5D4, maybe at some point until the year 2020 you will realize what i meant.
[/quote]

It's actually not. Perhaps your statements are too broad? As a sports shooter Nikon and Sony absolutely SUCK compared to the AF and lens performance for fast action sports, especially low light, vs. Canon. So not ALL areas of photography. I admit I have expensive stuff (1Dx, f/2.8 superteles) but I won't be buying anything for a long, long time because I won't need to. I don't have time to edit photos, so the 2-stop DR crap doesn't apply since I have to send right away in JPEG. THAT is where the AF ability, precision, accuracy, L-lens sharpness and AF quickness, and low-light ISO come in to play. When you don't get to fix things. You couldn't pay me enough to use another system for what I shoot.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 18, 2015)

Just to add:

From a photojournalist or sports shooter perspective, and this is going to sound really stupid, but actually out in the field the crop shooting modes on the 5Ds are more useful than and extra 2 stops of DR at ISO 100. So it keeps looking like Canon tailors to those types of shooters with their releases and I am fortunately in that group.


----------



## bdunbar79 (Jul 18, 2015)

I'm no longer allowed to post photos I take in these cases to a personal website, but I thought this might be a good example of a 1Dx/400 f/2.8L I IS combo at ISO 200. Both were shot at about 1pm on a bright, sunny day in incredibly harsh lighting (straight overhead sun). I had time to edit these two photos briefly and lifted the shadows a great deal for their faces. I brought down the highlights a lot too. This was a very harsh environment and I'm certain in JPG I wouldn't have even submitted them. You'll have to ignore the other aspects of the photos because the school downsized them, cropped the parts they needed, and merged the two sections together. But, just from a shadow-lifting perspective only I'm posting. And CLEARLY they could have been better with 2 more stops or 1.5 stops. I totally agree. But it was certainly good enough.

From the GLIAC golf tournament:

http://goashlandeagles.com/sports/wgolf/2014-15/releases/20150707qmjvqu


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 18, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> Having witnessed how Zeiss test their lenses including on F Stop / T Stop machine I would say in that typical Germanic way they strive to be accurate, very accurate.


Yes, Zeiss lenses are great performers and have little sample variation, but they also have their downsides that people who don't own them don't see, or people who own them ignore (Disclaimer: I own the whole top lineup myself). Most Zeiss lenses for example are not to useful for landscape photography, as their focus infinity already starts at around 50 meters (like their 15/.28), while with Canon lenses you can easily distinguish and adjust the exact focus point among 50, 250, 500 or 1000 meters. Autofocus users and users who stop down or don't have a large monitor don't realize this Zeiss limitation, but it's a fact and i have it even confirmed in written form by Zeiss. 

In general, all these DXO Mark values might also be correct based on their test system, but real world shows different results like regarding transmission/brightness. Example: DXO Mark lists the Red Dragon sensor as best performer. I own 2 Red Epic Dragon and know that the 5D3 will definitely deliver better and less noisy results after raw processing, which is no wonder as a Canon raw file is much larger than a Red raw frame. The cool thing about the Red is to have 100 frames a second in 6K, but the Canon image potential is way ahead, which makes the DXO Mark numbers pretty useless again. 

Canon also has many fields where they outperfom competitors. Stabilized Canon lenses for example are a pleasure on MFT cameras like the GH4 when it comes to stabilization, which is much better than the Lumix' own system. I think if Canon wants to, they could be ahead of any competitor, and the forthcoming Canon expo will show what they are capable of (but unfortunately spread over 5-10 years).

Knowing this, the lack of bringing the quality into the products is what can make you angry as a customer. In the 5DsR they have finally built in an internal timelapse timer feature. But is it useful like in the competitors menus, where you can set a start time and a 4-digit number of images, so you don't have to wake up at night twice to start and stop your timelapse? No, Canon has implemented a 2(!) digit number only of photos your timelapse can do automatically, without a dedicated start time - which means you still need external equipment to do it right.

Same with the world premiere of the video autofocus function in the 5DsR, which lets even all non-STM lenses focus in video - other manufacturers would have cherished it, but Canon wants to avoid that anybody who is doing video buys a 5DsR and instead buys a second and more expensive dedicated video product. All this makes you think that Canon is not really interested in you as a customer at all, at least not like the feeling you can have with Sony or Panasonic at the moment.
[/quote]
Your missing my point so let me if I may explain it differently. We have a T Stop machine, a Euro 350K MTF, which we can use on and off axis as well as multi-point, a specially designed projector, housed in a specially designed room. Every lens we purchase we test at each T stop and at each distance on the scale. With the projector were looking for chromatic aberrations of different types as well as field curvature issues and even field illumination. Zeiss do not engrave each distance they do infinity and six feet & extrapolate the other distances but to get to your point if we were repeatedly seeing Zeiss lenses with inaccurate T Stops we would reject the lenses with a set of Master Primes coming in well over Euro 250K and shows with multi-million budget shooting with them we would not except second class and neither would the DOPs testing them, this applies to all their cinematography lenses. 
Historically the Canon K35 lenses were actually faster than their engraved T stops and varied far more than Zeiss, and Canon still have a larger variation albeit were talking small variations. We test all cameras with the same carefully selected 50 mm lens using a device to test the dynamic range of all digital movie cameras that works fine also testing DSLRs and were able to see the variation in individual camera sensitivity within the same type. 
All this is important because you can get a wider error depending which side of the optimum setting the lens or camera is. I doubt most people are able to test in the same conditions week in week out to give repeatable results I know Zeiss can as we can.


----------



## raptor3x (Jul 19, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> HELP!!! My theory is that the same lens under the same settings is brighter on Nikon bodies than on Canon bodies, and you prove me wrong because you compare a Canon body with a Sony body? *Obviously the difference i mean will come through different internal ISO ratings or processing by Nikon, and not necessarily the sensor - i said that before.* Now as a modern Sony sensor has less noise and dynamic range than a current Canon sensor, any way you look at it won't make Canon a winner here. I wish it would be the other way around!



Thank for soundly demonstrating that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. It really amazes me that somebody can, apparently, spend so much time with so much high end camera equipment and yet be so incredibly clueless. Just because I'm sure you don't understand, in order for what you're saying to be true, Nikon would need to be getting >100% QE from the same sensor used in the A7R in order to double the brightness at a given ISO setting while maintaining the same SNR and DR.


----------



## douglaurent (Jul 19, 2015)

Your missing my point so let me if I may explain it differently. We have a T Stop machine, a Euro 350K MTF, which we can use on and off axis as well as multi-point, a specially designed projector, housed in a specially designed room. Every lens we purchase we test at each T stop and at each distance on the scale. With the projector were looking for chromatic aberrations of different types as well as field curvature issues and even field illumination. Zeiss do not engrave each distance they do infinity and six feet & extrapolate the other distances but to get to your point if we were repeatedly seeing Zeiss lenses with inaccurate T Stops we would reject the lenses with a set of Master Primes coming in well over Euro 250K and shows with multi-million budget shooting with them we would not except second class and neither would the DOPs testing them, this applies to all their cinematography lenses. 
Historically the Canon K35 lenses were actually faster than their engraved T stops and varied far more than Zeiss, and Canon still have a larger variation albeit were talking small variations. We test all cameras with the same carefully selected 50 mm lens using a device to test the dynamic range of all digital movie cameras that works fine also testing DSLRs and were able to see the variation in individual camera sensitivity within the same type. 
All this is important because you can get a wider error depending which side of the optimum setting the lens or camera is. I doubt most people are able to test in the same conditions week in week out to give repeatable results I know Zeiss can as we can. 
[/quote]

It just doesn't help when on paper technical data does show results that are different in real world. Zeiss lenses simply deliver a bit darker images than their competitors from other brands, and that's not a question of sample variation, its the same with many different types of Zeiss lenses i bought from different sources at different times. Maybe all the layers that lead to extra sharpness and less chromatic abberations on Zeiss lenses are responsible for that. 
Something's nobody is going to measure, but is highly unsatisfying when working with it in real world, is the already mentioned lack of infinity focus distance. It just can't make sense that you simply focus to the infinity limit at a let's say 15/f2.8 (or CP.2 15/T2.9) and everything between 50 meters and infinity is declared to be in focus, when other brand's lenses give you room to focus on many more distance levels between this close and infinity range. In 4K videos or 20 megapixel landscape videos probably nobody has really recognized a problem yet, but when you for example shoot with a 5DsR at 15mm wide open with the Zeiss and a Tamron 15-30, in far away distances you might be able to see differences in the focus point. The very short focus way on Zeiss lenses is extremely disappointing for me on the CP.2 cinema versions, as their housing and long focus wheels usually should be giving a lot more range to focus - and not next to nothing at a certain tele range.


----------



## tcmatthews (Jul 19, 2015)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


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



I prefer swivel screens. With my 60D I kept the screen tilted to the body to prevent accidental damage. I have always felt more comfortable carrying it around like that then my 6D that cannot swivel. My 60D screen would have two scratches if it could not swivel. I would personally like to see a pro quality swivel screen. Magnesium back with gorilla glass gapless screen. So that it can actual be seen in bright light. 

Every time I take a low shot with my 6D I curse the fact the screen cannot swivel.


----------



## RGF (Jul 19, 2015)

tcmatthews said:


> I prefer swivel screens. With my 60D I kept the screen tilted to the body to prevent accidental damage. I have always felt more comfortable carrying it around like that then my 6D that cannot swivel. My 60D screen would have two scratches if it could not swivel. I would personally like to see a pro quality swivel screen. Magnesium back with gorilla glass gapless screen. So that it can actual be seen in bright light.
> 
> Every time I take a low shot with my 6D I curse the fact the screen cannot swivel.



At first I thought swivel screens were a gimmick. But trying to shoot low recently I realized how valuable they can be. Nice to be able to tilt the screen up when the camera is at ground level.

Also would be nice to have scratch proof screens or an inexpensive coating that could be easily replaced.


----------



## LonelyBoy (Jul 20, 2015)

douglaurent said:


> a modern Sony sensor has less [...] dynamic range than a current Canon sensor



I don't think that was actually what you intended to say.


----------



## eninja (Jul 21, 2015)

RGF said:


> tcmatthews said:
> 
> 
> > I prefer swivel screens. With my 60D I kept the screen tilted to the body to prevent accidental damage. I have always felt more comfortable carrying it around like that then my 6D that cannot swivel. My 60D screen would have two scratches if it could not swivel. I would personally like to see a pro quality swivel screen. Magnesium back with gorilla glass gapless screen. So that it can actual be seen in bright light.
> ...



Yes I understand this point, I think others also do. We need full frame with swivel screen. But imho, professional (or serious) wise, I can not think of a situation why swivel screen is a MUST. If you ask me, I don't want them to implement swivel on the next 6D. When I take photo, I want to have a luxury of just pull the camera out of the bag, without worrying what can tangled and break. And I believe this is the main philosophy of Canon, "able to take quality photo" and try not to compromise as much as possible on their design. If I shoot video, probably most doesn't need shallow depth of field. And if I compare how many times I prefer the camera being rug, than having a swivel screen. having a swivel screen is negligible.


----------



## candyman (Jul 21, 2015)

eninja said:


> RGF said:
> 
> 
> > tcmatthews said:
> ...



I never thought I would say this, but I do like to have a swivel screen in the successor of the 6D
For situations like these:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5895.msg530058#msg530058

My tripod was all the way down on a very rocky underground. I had to lay down on the rocks to look through the viewfinder for the right composition. I am not 25 and it was not comfortable at all. Tru, I could use the Canon Angle finder but a swivel screen is much more convenient in this kind of situation and for this kind of photography.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 21, 2015)

Sony have tiltable screens the the A7 series of cameras, Ive got this on the Olympus OM-D E-M10 camera I have and its a very useful function when required (not often) particularly shooting above over people or very low tripod shots. However I regularly use the iPhone app. on my Canon 6D over wi-fi with the camera in live-view I can see the picture, focus and shoot remotely and have control over aperture and stop so its not a deal breaker either.


----------



## candyman (Jul 21, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> Sony have tiltable screens the the A7 series of cameras, Ive got this on the Olympus OM-D E-M10 camera I have and its a very useful function when required (not often) particularly shooting above over people or very low tripod shots. However I regularly use *the iPhone app.* on my Canon 6D over wi-fi with the camera in live-view I can see the picture, focus and shoot remotely and have control over aperture and stop so its not a deal breaker either.



What is the name of this app? I use Android.
Sounds like a good solution. I would like to try it out.


----------



## Djaaf (Jul 21, 2015)

jeffa4444 said:


> Sony have tiltable screens the the A7 series of cameras, Ive got this on the Olympus OM-D E-M10 camera I have and its a very useful function when required (not often) particularly shooting above over people or very low tripod shots. However I regularly use the iPhone app. on my Canon 6D over wi-fi with the camera in live-view I can see the picture, focus and shoot remotely and have control over aperture and stop so its not a deal breaker either.




Yeah, I had it with my 60D, have the tiltable screen on the E-M10 and curse everytime i have to take a shot on a low tripod or close to the ground or over my head with my 6D... 
I really did like the feature... :-/ 

And the Android/iPhone app, while relatively nice, is still cumbersome compared to just having the screen tilting... 
Oh, and I do have a Windows Phone, by the way... So... No Canon app for me... (and a third party app to connect to my Olympus... ) Come on, Canon... It's been a few years already ! 

For the previous poster : the app is named EOS Remote and you can find it in the Google Play store. 


Djaaf.


----------



## jd7 (Jul 21, 2015)

candyman said:


> jeffa4444 said:
> 
> 
> > Sony have tiltable screens the the A7 series of cameras, Ive got this on the Olympus OM-D E-M10 camera I have and its a very useful function when required (not often) particularly shooting above over people or very low tripod shots. However I regularly use *the iPhone app.* on my Canon 6D over wi-fi with the camera in live-view I can see the picture, focus and shoot remotely and have control over aperture and stop so its not a deal breaker either.
> ...



The app is called EOS Remote. You can download it for Android from Google Play store (or Apple's App Store if using Apple gear).

There is also a fairly new app called Canon Camera Connect. Not sure what the differences are between it and EOS Remote.


----------



## jeffa4444 (Jul 21, 2015)

candyman said:


> jeffa4444 said:
> 
> 
> > Sony have tiltable screens the the A7 series of cameras, Ive got this on the Olympus OM-D E-M10 camera I have and its a very useful function when required (not often) particularly shooting above over people or very low tripod shots. However I regularly use *the iPhone app.* on my Canon 6D over wi-fi with the camera in live-view I can see the picture, focus and shoot remotely and have control over aperture and stop so its not a deal breaker either.
> ...


The app. is "EOS Remote"available on Google Play for Android.


----------



## candyman (Jul 21, 2015)

Triple thanks!


----------



## switters (Jul 28, 2015)

ahsanford said:


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



Late to the party here, but this single feature nearly made me ditch my 5DIII for a mirrorless system like the X-T1, which has this ability. The 1D series is way too much camera for what I need; it's really frustrating to have to upgrade for this single reason.

Can someone point me toward info on enabling this feature using Magic Lantern?


----------



## ahsanford (Jul 29, 2015)

switters said:


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



See here: Pan about 2/3 of the way down.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=25789.0

- A


----------



## raptor3x (Jul 30, 2015)

switters said:


> Late to the party here, but this single feature nearly made me ditch my 5DIII for a mirrorless system like the X-T1, which has this ability. The 1D series is way too much camera for what I need; it's really frustrating to have to upgrade for this single reason.
> 
> Can someone point me toward info on enabling this feature using Magic Lantern?



The X-T1 only has spot metering in the center, just like the non-1D Canon bodies. AFAIK there aren't any mirrorless bodies that offer spot metering linked to AF point.


----------



## josephz1994 (Aug 1, 2015)

Worth waiting for the Canon 5D Mark IV? or just purchase the 5D iii now ?


----------



## Maximilian (Aug 3, 2015)

josephz1994 said:


> Worth waiting for the Canon 5D Mark IV? or just purchase the 5D iii now ?


Hi Joseph!

It always depends on what you need and when you need it. And of course on your bank account 

If you buy a 5D3 now, you'll get an extraordinary tool, mechanical built, AF technology, etc. for a great price right now but a sensor and IQ that is 4 years old but not limiting a whole bunch of pros and amateurs around the world. 

If you can afford to wait some extra months - maybe more than a year, because we don't know when the 5D4 will be released - then you'll get an extraordinary tool with everything a little bit better, maybe quite notable better than the 5D3 but also for an extraordinary price close to the MRSP and not getting lower for the first 6 months.

By the way: Lately all manufacturers had some flaws with their cameras during the first few months after the market introductions. (hoping, the 5D4 will be perfect)


----------

