# Poll: Would you buy a high MP Canon EOS 5DIV?



## Maiaibing (Sep 26, 2014)

The question is hypothetical and presumes 

1) a 5DIV would improve generically on the 5DIII but with a significant MP boost (at least 32MP compared to the existing 22MP for the 5DIII)

2) the price range of such a camera would follow the pattern of the 5D-family (around 3.500$ at launch)


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 26, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> 1) a 5DIV would improve generically on the 5DIII but with a significant MP boost (at least 32MP compared to the existing 22MP for the 5DIII)



Imho these two goals conflict with each other, at least with the current technology's speed. The 5d3 is the best "all around" camera, but if you simply move the balance to the resolution side you'll end up with too much data for photojournalism and sports/action shooting - the 1dx has "just" 18mp for a reason.

To get an upgraded "all in one" package there have to be significant changes, so it's possible Canon will simply push a simply old-school update with 24mp, 4k video, a bit better everything and dual pixel af. The first high mp incarnation would reserved for a 1dxs until the 5d5 arrives.


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 26, 2014)

I am fine with 20 to 24 MP. 
I don't care for more than 30 MP because _for me_ it only costs disk space and makes pixel peepers happy - or even not.
Same MP, better high and low ISO performance, maybe some DR on top and I'm fine.

To say it in other words:
The 5D4 must have a real big improvement in IQ (not pixel resolution) that you can recognize *at once* in real world usage. 
Minor improvements (half an stop ISO here, little less noise there) are not enough.
Otherwise I am not interested at all.


----------



## tron (Sep 26, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> The question is hypothetical and presumes
> 
> 1) a 5DIV would improve generically on the 5DIII but with a significant MP boost (at least 32MP compared to the existing 22MP for the 5DIII)
> 
> 2) the price range of such a camera would follow the pattern of the 5D-family (around 3.500$ at launch)


+1 Plus, the poll assumes that Canon will mess with 5D series and increase the MP count instead of improving noise and DR.


----------



## FEBS (Sep 26, 2014)

Maximilian said:


> I am fine with 20 to 24 MP.
> I don't care for more than 30 MP because _for me_ it only costs disk space and makes pixel peepers happy - or even not.
> Same MP, better high and low ISO performance, maybe some DR on top and I'm fine.
> 
> ...



+1

exact the same thought. I don't need all those megapixels as I presume that fps will drop in that case. The 5D3 is such a versatile camera. I would not buy if I only see small improvements. Higher ISO combined with less noise is much more important to me then 20Mp added to the resolution.


----------



## Omni Images (Sep 26, 2014)

YES,
I shoot landscape and only something like a 10-12 shot stitch or a scan of a film image from my Linhof 120 pano will be good enough to print an image in the size I want will do. I scan the 120 pano in at about a 2gig file size.
There is no way I can afford something like a Hasselblad 40-60 meg or a Phase One or Better Light back for my 4x5 etc .. so a one shot digital camera could do the job for me.


----------



## melbournite (Sep 26, 2014)

As a Canon 5D user over every generation, I can't tick any of the selections. 

I understand the premise of your question but there are so many other factors to consider. MP is only one of them.


----------



## tomscott (Sep 26, 2014)

The 5D line has always been an event photographers camera and thats who buys them. The files as they are are a good size, making the MP 30+will increase the files by a 1/3 and after editing a raw and saving it as a PSD they are already in the 250mb range which is more than enough. You can only fit 1000 images on a 32gb card so at a typical wedding your shooting 64gbs as it is shooting redundancy is 128gb. It basically means more money to be spent on storage reducing profit margins. When your not printing past A2 or even A1 that space is wasted. Granted it gives you room to crop, but most event shooters don't shoot to crop just adds time in post. 

its not a landscape camera and most event shooters don't need that kind of resolution.

The high MP camera designation was always the 1DS and I hope that continues or I for one as an event photographer will be disappointed as Canon won't make a camera for lets be honest the main area photography is still commercial. Landscape photography is a niche, there are not many photographers making a living from it anymore.

I would be happy with a modest boost to 24 or even staying the same with an improvement in noise performance and adding a few other features like GPS and possibly making the camera a little lighter.


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 26, 2014)

Maximilian said:


> I am fine with 20 to 24 MP.
> I don't care for more than 30 MP because _for me_ it only costs disk space and makes pixel peepers happy - or even not.
> Same MP, better high and low ISO performance, maybe some DR on top and I'm fine.
> 
> ...


+1.


----------



## Sella174 (Sep 26, 2014)

Add choice to the poll for "only if mirrorless". Plus Canon can make mirrored and mirrorless versions.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 26, 2014)

No, but I'd likely buy a high MP 1-series body.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 26, 2014)

Sella174 said:


> Add choice to the poll for "only if mirrorless". Plus Canon can make mirrored and mirrorless versions.



[X] ... Yes!


----------



## torger (Sep 26, 2014)

I'm interested in a high MP Canon, but I would be disappointed if they are not competitive with the Sony sensors concerning base ISO dynamic range. I'm less interested in high ISO performance as I would not intend to use a high MP camera as an all-around camera, but rather use it as I use my medium format camera today, ie carefully set up shots from a tripod shot with base ISO.

As I shoot landscape, and I expect many will with a high MP Canon as landscape photography is huge among amateurs, base ISO dynamic range is of interest.


----------



## caruser (Sep 26, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> No, but I'd likely buy a high MP 1-series body.



+1


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Sep 26, 2014)

For my use, I do NOT want more megapixel. But I know some people who WANT to, and a very small group of people who really NEED more megapixel. 
For this small group who really need above 30 megapixel, Canon should release a series 1 body to replace 1Ds Mark iii.


----------



## Coolhandchuck (Sep 26, 2014)

Bring on a high MP 5D!!! Those that say it won't work for photojournalists or sports photographers because the files are too large and would take up too much card space, I say this... Can't one select the size of the RAW file they want to use? I thought so... Problem solved. Why is this even a question honestly? Some of us like to exercise choice.


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 26, 2014)

Coolhandchuck said:


> Can't one select the size of the RAW file they want to use? I thought so...



No, one cannot because the downsized sraw and mraw aren't real "raw" files but cooked in the camera - so if you want the best quality you'll end up with the full resolution size. An option that would make sense is a raw crop mode for focal length limited shots like Nikon has it, but Canon never showed any aspiration to follow suit.


----------



## tomscott (Sep 26, 2014)

SRAW and MRAW aren't the answer to full Raw file on a higher MP Camera. The whole point of Raw is that they aren't compressed and contain all the original data.


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 26, 2014)

tron said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > The question is hypothetical and presumes
> ...



+1


----------



## Click (Sep 26, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> No, but I'd likely buy a high MP 1-series body.



+1


----------



## Dave Sucsy (Sep 26, 2014)

Would I buy a high MP Canon EOS 5D4?
YES! (with provisos)

Until the D800, I had been a loyal Canon user since my first real digital camera.
In this last generation of cameras (5D3, D800), half of all of my friends and associates (pro and amateur) have switched away from Canon, to either Nikon or Sony.

File storage cost is not an issue for me. Storage is extremely cheap, all things considered, and continues to get cheaper!

Cost-effective image quality is paramount for me. (A $50,000+ "medium-format" system is not cost effective for me.) Image quality includes dynamic range, noise, resolution, banding and other artifacts, false-color, and many other factors.

At significant cost and inconvenience I switched from Canon to Nikon and went with the D800 instead of the Canon 5D3. I wanted to stay with Canon. But the Nikon files are much more malleable in that I can better enhance shadow detail and dynamic range.

I am a full-time pro and do aerial photography, architecture, landscapes, cityscapes, portraiture, lifestyle, and product photography. The image quality that the Nikon D800 series gives me is currently the best solution for me.
The physical attributes of the camera are acceptable (focusing, button placement, ergonomics, etc.). The 5D3 is better in some ways, and the D800 is better in some ways, so it is a wash. Both do a pretty good job in creating a physically usable photographic tool.

Would I go back to Canon if they offered higher image quality?
Yes, but only if it were extremely compelling. 
I am sick of Canon's betraying me and their lack of good faith. (likewise with Nikon). Canon could and should provide a camera with these productivity features that most pros need or could use:
This is mostly technology that is current and readily available even on some of the cheapest consumer-grade cameras!

Built-in Wi-Fi
Built-in GPS with automatic clock and time-zone setting (I always need to know where a file was captured, and always need my clock and time zone to be accurate. And having to reset the clocks on 5-20 devices every time I cross a time zone (sometimes multiple times per day) is absurd!!!)
User-configurable "A-Dep" to accurately control depth of field
Speech recognition IPTC field data insertion, and voice memo
Excellent image quality with 50MP+ resolution

Lenses that are fully up to the task are a crucial part of this mix. Sigma seems to be taking this seriously with their "Art" line of lenses. Truly excellent zoom lenses in the $1000-$2500 price range seem reasonable. We already have some truly excellent primes for as little as $125 (Canon 50mm f1.8 ).

Bayer technology has some inherently huge limitations to image quality, but most of those can be overcome by increased sampling (higher resolution).

YES!!!! I want a high MP (50MP+) camera (5D4?) from Canon!!!
A lower resolution (25MP), and higher-ISO 6D camera line could directly handle the niche needs of event-only photographers, who sometimes crank out a HUGE number of frames per day.
But Canon are really going to have to up their game to win me (and many of my friends and associates) back!


----------



## Dylan777 (Sep 26, 2014)

Click said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > No, but I'd likely buy a high MP 1-series body.
> ...



-1...I hope Canon will release another 1-series just for high MP shooters, not in 1DX II.


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Sep 26, 2014)

Dave Sucsy said:


> YES!!!! I want a high MP (50MP+) camera (5D4?) from Canon!!!
> A lower resolution (25MP), and higher-ISO 6D camera line could directly handle the niche needs of event-only photographers, who sometimes crank out a HUGE number of frames per day.
> But Canon are really going to have to up their game to win me (and many of my friends and associates) back!


Event-only photographers are a niche market? ;D ;D ;D ;D This is the largest market for Canon and the reason for its leadership in sales. : In most countries the photographers who make events work with 60D and 6D.  In richer countries 5D Mark ii, and 5D Mark iii are most at events. ??? 

D800 and D800E was a niche market, the same as 1DS Mark iii was.


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 26, 2014)

If I had all the money in the world I would buy a 100MP medium format body.
The majority of the time I can take a few seconds to set up each shot. More FPS is better, it would be nice to shoot BIF with the same body, but if Canon produced a body with an insanely high megapixel count and low FPS I wouldn't complain.


----------



## Quackator (Sep 26, 2014)

My highest interest would be guaranteed if not only the resolution 
would increase (moderately) but much more important: A new sensor
doing away with color problems that Bayer patterns bring to the table.
And a global shutter that serves both for video as well as overcomes 
the x-sync barrier. And more ISO power.

A 3 or 4 layer sensor might cope much better with discontinuous light
sources such as fluorescent and many LEDs, and global flash sync would 
be a godsent for sports with flash.


----------



## Sella174 (Sep 26, 2014)

ajfotofilmagem said:


> Event-only photographers are a niche market?



A niche market need not necessarily be a small market. Diapers are also a niche market ... ;D

Also interesting is that you mentioned four different cameras as being used by "event-only" photographers. If Canon was really on the ball with their cameras, then all "event-only" photographers would be using the same camera. But four different cameras simply means that these photographers are compromising due to what is offered. (And then we're not even counting all those RX100's and X-Pro's in use by said niche market.)


----------



## AlanF (Sep 26, 2014)

I would buy if it had a crop mode so I didn't have to download horrendously huge files.


----------



## Sella174 (Sep 26, 2014)

AlanF said:


> I would buy if it had a crop mode so I didn't have to download horrendously huge files.



That feature is called a 70D and you already own one.


----------



## candyman (Sep 26, 2014)

No. 24 mp would be enough for me....along with....http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=22778.msg440866#msg440866


----------



## Maiaibing (Sep 26, 2014)

Sella174 said:


> AlanF said:
> 
> 
> > I would buy if it had a crop mode so I didn't have to download horrendously huge files.
> ...


Its also in both the 5DII and 5DIII as well as in the Nikon D800 and D810 - so I can venture to say already; It will!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 26, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> Sella174 said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



The 5DIII and 5DIII have a crop mode? News to me... mRAW and sRAW deliver the full FoV, as do the more compressed JPG files. A crop mode delivers a FoV less than the full sensor.


----------



## Maiaibing (Sep 26, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > AlanF said:
> ...



No, my answer was to the main question which was about avoiding huge files.


----------



## pierlux (Sep 26, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> No, but I'd likely buy a high MP 1-series body.


You don't know as yet, but I know you will buy the 7D2, despite what you already stated.

Because it has an amazing autofocus.

Because GPS is a feature that will be very useful in many situations.

Because you'll admit to yourself that price is not the *only* advantage of a crop body (well, you already admitted it when you recently modified your previous convinction by stating that it's the *main* advantage, not that you were wrong before, but because the 7D2 didn't exist yet): apart from the other advantages, you might find that, with good light, your 600L on its 20 MP sensor produces better images than 600L+1,4x extender on FF without losing 1 f/stop and with the plus of slightly more reach.

Because having 1Dx+600 and 7D2+70-300 handy (or the opposite on occasion) can be really useful.

Because it's a nice toy to play with.

Because it's cheap, it costs only a small fraction of the value of all your gear put together.

Because the Black Rapid Double Strap is cool.

But, most of all, because I need your hands-on advice to help me decide: 70D or 7D2?   

Preorder now!


----------



## pierlux (Sep 26, 2014)

Ah, I voted for: "Probably. If the reviews confirm the hype and the price is right" and I'd add "But only after the price comes down". A lot.


----------



## Zv (Sep 26, 2014)

I'm holding out for a 5DIV in the hopes of it having significantly better IQ over the MkII that I have. Not concerned with megapixels at this moment in my photographic life. The 20 or so that I have now seems to work just fine, I would be fine with something like 24MP. Anything more would mean upgrading my laptop, software and getting more HD's etc etc.


----------



## DigiAngel (Sep 26, 2014)

Megapixels are just fine now. I´d like less shadow noise and overall better sensor performance for my 5D Mk IV.

And Canon if you want to innovate again: a hybrid OVF/EVF would mean instant cash for you.


----------



## Sabaki (Sep 26, 2014)

Well, it would depend on a few things. 

Firstly, does a high mega pixel camera mean geared towards only landscape shots or will it have a competent AF system that will make me feel easy about shootings events on it?

I don't want a lumbering beast that only does 3-5 fps and would take too long to write images to a card.


----------



## applecider (Sep 26, 2014)

This is what I'd like to see in a new 5 d order of importance:

Same mount or at least use of current lenses w/o adapter.

MP in range of 26-36 for better crop resolution. I expect we'll get 24MP.

Gain in high ISO quality, decreased noise. One stop would be wonderful.

Better autofocus.

Wifi and gps and eos utility for iOS to tether to ipad. Built in radio flash control

6-8 frames per sec.

Price $3500 range compete w d810


And almost last in order of importance to me better DR.

Intervalometer, focus bracketing. No loss of current functions HDR etc.


----------



## cliffwang (Sep 26, 2014)

I would like to see
24+ MP with same or better high ISO
GPS
4K

Of cause, subject tracking and face detection and lower price are welcomed.


----------



## Bruce Photography (Sep 26, 2014)

When Canon finally gets into the high MP game, I would probably buy either a 1D series or a 5D series regardless of price in the 40MP area or better. As a landscape guy I don't need a fast camera but I would like one with a large buffer with a frame rate of 3 fps is probably good enough but for 50 raw full res images for tracking slow moving animals. The frame rate should be programmable.

Are things so bad now - NO. I love my D800 series cameras but I miss the Canon tilt shift lenses. I also have some other favorite Canon lenses but I'm not going to put any more money into Canon until they have the high MP camera. I'd rather not hear about market share or the issues confronting Canon marketing. I have no doubt that Canon will continue to prosper very well with out a high MP camera and does not need to have a photographer such as myself. However, if Canon wishes to sell equipment to folks like me, they will need to bring some sort of high MP product to market. And NO development announcement of a sensor or camera will do me any good. No announcement of a product next year, or the year after, or the year after that will help Canon or me.

I can wait. Too bad because that new 400mm DO lens looks tempting.....


----------



## tcmatthews (Sep 26, 2014)

I more than likely could not justify the cost of a high MP Canon EOS 5DIV. 

I remember a conversation when the D800 came out. An event shooter was complaining about the D800 having to much MP. Most of his customers did not want huge prints they wanted pictures for Facebook and such nonsense. The huge Raw images were slowing down his workflow. He was a life long Nikon shooter contemplating buying a 5D III. I do not know what ever happens with that but not everyone needs a high MP camera. And not everyone needs the auto-focus system of the 5D III. 

I would rather see them keep the 5DIV an event camera and make a separate High MP camera in the same body size or smaller. A smaller camera is not needed for studio work but could be very useful in landscape photography were hiking is involved.


----------



## FEBS (Sep 26, 2014)

Dylan777 said:


> Click said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



+1 to keep it simple 

Would love to see a higher MP 5-serie
A 1-serie as a high MP camera, hmmmm, I don't know, I fear they will loose speed in that case, so for that reason I would say, keep the 1Dx line as a high speed gun


----------



## distant.star (Sep 26, 2014)

.
My DSLR buying days are over. I have a 5D3, and that will hold me over through this transition period.

The future is mirrorless.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 26, 2014)

I didn't read all the posts...but...

How can you have a poll that asks this _"Yes. If the reviews confirm the hype."_

There is no "Hype", Canon hasn't announced a camera.
The only information anyone here has exists only in their imagination.


----------



## Maiaibing (Sep 26, 2014)

takesome1 said:


> How can you have a poll that asks this _"Yes. If the reviews confirm the hype."_
> There is no "Hype", Canon hasn't announced a camera.



Because there is always "hype" when a Canon FF 5-series DSLR is announced. If not from anyone else then from Canon Marketing. So extremely solid guess that there will be once again as soon as the 5DIV is announced.


----------



## takesome1 (Sep 26, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> takesome1 said:
> 
> 
> > How can you have a poll that asks this _"Yes. If the reviews confirm the hype."_
> ...



Yes, but we don't know the Hype yet 

If the Hype is 50mp with 10fps, DR twice what the cameras are now, an AF system that never misses, workable ISO to 12800 then yes please count me in.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 26, 2014)

It doesn't matter what I want. The 5D III was targeted to wedding and event photographers and its features have made it a must have among that group, by giving them a competitive advantage over photographers not using the 5D III. In contrast the Nikon 800 series has struggled to find an audience because it's features simply aren't targetted to a clear audience of significant size.

I am guessing that Canon will not abandon that audience but rather try to develop features that continues to give wedding and event photographers using canon a competitive advantage. It seems to me the biggest problem these photographers have today is that brides want pictures up on Facebook immediately (as in before the ceremony ends) and their friends can do it with their cellphones more quickly than the person they are paying to shoot the wedding can do it. The first manufacturer who can help pro photographers get images posted to social media as quickly and seamlessly as the wedding guest using an iPhone will have a winner in the marketplace. That's the sort of thing that will sell cameras, not megapixels, dynamic range, etc.

People on this forum can continue to whine, but it's that ability to help photographers meet the demands of their customers that should be the primary goal of Canon or any other company. That means integrated wifi, that is intuitive and quick, most likely with a touch screen interface and maybe even a simple photo editing program built into the camera's software.


----------



## FEBS (Sep 26, 2014)

unfocused said:


> It doesn't matter what I want. The 5D III was targeted to wedding and event photographers and its features have made it a must have among that group, by giving them a competitive advantage over photographers not using the 5D III. In contrast the Nikon 800 series has struggled to find an audience because it's features simply aren't targetted to a clear audience of significant size.
> 
> I am guessing that Canon will not abandon that audience but rather try to develop features that continues to give wedding and event photographers using canon a competitive advantage. It seems to me the biggest problem these photographers have today is that brides want pictures up on Facebook immediately (as in before the ceremony ends) and their friends can do it with their cellphones more quickly than the person they are paying to shoot the wedding can do it. The first manufacturer who can help pro photographers get images posted to social media as quickly and seamlessly as the wedding guest using an iPhone will have a winner in the marketplace. That's the sort of thing that will sell cameras, not megapixels, dynamic range, etc.
> 
> People on this forum can continue to whine, but it's that ability to help photographers meet the demands of their customers that should be the primary goal of Canon or any other company. That means integrated wifi, that is intuitive and quick, most likely with a touch screen interface and maybe even a simple photo editing program built into the camera's software.



+1

I do fully agree on your remarks


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Sep 27, 2014)

If by the reviews confirming the hype you mean that the sensor is state of the art and not a 2007 sensor but just with more MP.

If it delivers very good 4k video and has more MP with a lot better low ISO DR, then absolutely I would. If neither of those are true, no way. If one is true, then it depends upon various factors, but more likely than not (although I'd also be spending money elsewhere for sure too and not buying more Canon lenses and such for a while to fund the other stuff).


----------



## DRR (Sep 27, 2014)

I would take advantage by buying a gently used 5D3 that hits the market. ;D


----------



## pwp (Sep 27, 2014)

I'd hope a 5D4 wouldn't go past 24 mp, especially if it was at the cost of reduced high ISO performance. I shoot double page spreads, billboards and so on with a 1D 4 and 5D3. Please, no more mp's! Canon had it right settling on the 20-22 mp range with the 1Dx & 5D3. Issues like archive storage, card size, buffer depth, the need for seriously upgraded computers to run post pro on large jobs, ISO performance and so on firm up the argument for keeping the mp size in check. Hell, it's not a competition for the biggest, errm... 

I wouldn't argue against some photographers real or perceived needs for megapixel monsters, but that would be best served by a separate model, maybe a successor to the 1ds3. Either that or simply make a commitment to a MF system

-pw


----------



## Zv (Sep 27, 2014)

unfocused said:


> It doesn't matter what I want. The 5D III was targeted to wedding and event photographers and its features have made it a must have among that group, by giving them a competitive advantage over photographers not using the 5D III. In contrast the Nikon 800 series has struggled to find an audience because it's features simply aren't targetted to a clear audience of significant size.
> 
> I am guessing that Canon will not abandon that audience but rather try to develop features that continues to give wedding and event photographers using canon a competitive advantage. It seems to me the biggest problem these photographers have today is that brides want pictures up on Facebook immediately (as in before the ceremony ends) and their friends can do it with their cellphones more quickly than the person they are paying to shoot the wedding can do it. The first manufacturer who can help pro photographers get images posted to social media as quickly and seamlessly as the wedding guest using an iPhone will have a winner in the marketplace. That's the sort of thing that will sell cameras, not megapixels, dynamic range, etc.
> 
> People on this forum can continue to whine, but it's that ability to help photographers meet the demands of their customers that should be the primary goal of Canon or any other company. That means integrated wifi, that is intuitive and quick, most likely with a touch screen interface and maybe even a simple photo editing program built into the camera's software.



That would be pretty sweet if it could give you a share option when you're in the image preview screen. Or a dedicated share button that brings up a submenu with facebook or whatever when the camera is connected to a wifi hotspot or tethered to your phone. That way you could be shooting RAW files and be sharing select jpegs on the go. That would also mean people that aren't there get to see the highlights or BTS shots of an event as it happens.


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Sep 27, 2014)

I don't get this poll.


----------



## Rav (Sep 27, 2014)

Maximilian said:


> I am fine with 20 to 24 MP.
> I don't care for more than 30 MP because _for me_ it only costs disk space and makes pixel peepers happy - or even not.
> Same MP, better high and low ISO performance, maybe some DR on top and I'm fine.
> 
> ...


Pretty much this.
Other aspects become much more important once you have enough resolution, 20-24MP being enough for my needs, too. Apart from higher image quality improved AF is also something I'd take anytime over more pixels.

Finally, since I find myself not bringing the camera on many trips due to size and weight I'm hoping for a mirrorless ecosystem evolved enough to give me as a hobby FF shooter enough reasons to switch.


----------



## Maiaibing (Sep 27, 2014)

unfocused said:


> The 5D III was targeted to wedding and event photographers



Well... not according to Canon - so this is your theory or guess? What info do you have to substantiate such a claim that Canon - as far as I know - has never itself made about the 5DIII target group?



unfocused said:


> In contrast the Nikon 800 series has struggled to find an audience because it's features simply aren't targetted to a clear audience of significant size.



Another remarkable claim taking into consideration that Canon points to the 70D as the camera that is keeping their sales up while admitting their overall DSLR sales are into a double digit percentage dive - while Nikon is said to enjoy a much more sales curve over the last two years (have not seen a break down on Nikon camera models though so may not be 800-series driving this).

But please point us to the info you have on Canon 5DIII sales being much better than the 800-series. Sales figures are of big interest to lots of people here.



unfocused said:


> People on this forum can continue to whine, but it's that ability to help photographers meet the demands of their customers that should be the primary goal of Canon or any other company. That means integrated wifi, that is intuitive and quick, most likely with a touch screen interface and maybe even a simple photo editing program built into the camera's software.



Not sure what you are trying to say here. Its "whining" if other people have wishes for their next Canon but your wish list is not? Regardless, I'd like those features too (and a lot more excellent MP) for the 5DIV.


----------



## Mitch.Conner (Sep 27, 2014)

unfocused said:


> The 5D III was targeted to wedding and event photographers



Seriously? I'm neither and it's worked out well for me so far.

Is that from official marketing materials/press releases, or your opinion?

I'm genuinely asking.


----------



## pwp (Sep 27, 2014)

Mitch.Conner said:


> unfocused said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D III was targeted to wedding and event photographers
> ...


The 5D3 specs make it a highly useful and relevant tool for wedding and event photographers, no question. Obviously the feature set makes it useful and relevant for all sorts of other photographers as well. I saw Unfocused's post, in the context of this thread being a comment that wedding and event photographers probably don't need more megapixels, indeed, more megapixels may be more of a hindrance than a help especially when you're potentially shooting thousands of frames per event/function. That's a lot of data to manage.

It would be reasonably certain that Canon market researchers would consider potential target markets for any of their products, be they DSLR bodies, lenses, pocket cameras or office photocopiers, and tailor the product accordingly. All successful manufacturers do this as a matter of course. For the most part, Canon tend to get this part of the process right. Their market-leading sales are evidence enough.

-pw


----------



## pwp (Sep 27, 2014)

Poll: Would you buy a high MP Canon EOS 5DIV?
Interesting that the leading vote at this point is NO to a high MP 5D4.

But yikes, now that the 7D2 has been announced, is 5D4 speculation going to be a dominant topic here for the next year or so? 

-pw


----------



## pierlux (Sep 27, 2014)

jrista said:


> I don't see the option I want





Mitch.Conner said:


> I don't get this poll.





pierlux said:


> Ah, I voted for: "Probably. If the reviews confirm the hype and the price is right" and I'd add "But only after the price comes down". A lot.





pwp said:


> Interesting that the leading vote at this point is NO to a high MP 5D4.


Since the question is "Would you buy a high MP Canon EOS 5D4" I'd have answered "Yes, when the price comes down, no matter how many fps because I'll use it for studio/macro/landscape only."

Regardless of my specific preferences, maybe this poll does not include enough options, nor the right ones. But this poll makes sense to me. Assuming a high MP 5D4 will cost approx as much as the 5D3/D810, I'd have preferred the following:


Hell, yes! I'd preorder as soon as possible.

Yes, if higher MP comes along with IQ equal to, or better than, the 5D3, plus the latest bells & whistles".

Probably, if the reviews are favourable.

Possibly, it depends on what the competition has to offer at the time in the DSLR compartment.

No, I'm not interested in a high MP camera, I'd rather care for monster framerate and high ISO IQ.

No, because I'm leaning towards a high MP mirrorless.

Absolutely no. I'm fed up with Canon. 

Then I'd vote the second option.


By the way, my yesterday's reply to neuro in this thread was not intended to be posted here, I suppose since I had several tabs open on different threads i messed up things. Since in the end it was only meant as a fun post I didn't bother to cancel it. No attempt to hijack the thread, just said to myself oh, well... never mind.


----------



## JonAustin (Sep 27, 2014)

I'm waiting for the announcement / release of the 5D4 (whatever resolution it has), so that the price of the 5D3 will drop enough for me to buy a second copy.


----------



## magic koala (Sep 27, 2014)

High MP is not a priority in my shooting but I always like to get the latest 5D and 7D models since I like and I am committed to the Canon ecosystem. I've never been disappointed by Canon (except for their cheaper point and shoot models). I also seem to fit in the 5D and 7D pricing demographics so it's an easy decision for my wallet as well.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 27, 2014)

pwp said:


> The 5D3 specs make it a highly useful and relevant tool for wedding and event photographers, no question. Obviously the feature set makes it useful and relevant for all sorts of other photographers as well. I saw Unfocused's post, in the context of this thread being a comment that wedding and event photographers probably don't need more megapixels, indeed, more megapixels may be more of a hindrance than a help especially when you're potentially shooting thousands of frames per event/function. That's a lot of data to manage.



Last year, a friend who's a pro wedding/event photographer was looking to update her pair of D700 bodies. It was recommended that she get the D600 over the D800, with an acknowledgement that neither was really a good replacement for the D700. 

The source of that recommendation? Nikon Professional Services.


----------



## AvTvM (Sep 27, 2014)

I hope, she didn't buy back then. Now 2x D750 will serve her just fine. 



neuroanatomist said:


> Last year, a friend who's a pro wedding/event photographer was looking to update her pair of D700 bodies. It was recommended that she get the D600 over the D800, with an acknowledgement that neither was really a good replacement for the D700. The source of that recommendation? Nikon Professional Services.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Sep 27, 2014)

I would never buy a camera just because it had more MP. The camera would have to have features I needed, and improved IQ. More MP does not mean better IQ.


----------



## Gino (Sep 27, 2014)

I'd like Canon to keep the 5D Mark IV in the 24-30MP range. If they produce a higher resolution camera, then it should be a separate camera line....3D.

My 5D Mark IV wish list:

* 24-30MP
* Dual Compact Flash card slots
* 8 fps in burst mode with a buffer that can handle at least 35 full resolution RAW files writing to both memory card slots.
* Improved ISO & Dynamic Range performance
* Improved autofocus system with wider coverage of autofocus points
* Red lighted autofocus points that are easy to see in the view finder in low light conditions in all autofocus modes
* A better metering system with metering tied to the selected autofocus points
* 1/400 sec flash synch speed
* The back of the camera should have backlit buttons that are easy to see in the dark, like the Nikon D4


----------



## dafrank (Sep 27, 2014)

I voted "Yes. If the reviews confirm the hype," if anyone cares, even a little bit.

I'd like the 5D4 with much better, faster refresh and higher res live view and better on chip focusing - creating, in effect, both a mirrored and mirror-less camera in the same body, and a little more of the live-view LCD overlay to perhaps create a very good and accurate central manual focusing area in an even larger, "sharper" and equally bright optical viewfinder. 36 to 52 MP with insanely fast processing and a giant speedy buffer would be best. And so would be both a good S Raw option *and* and 1.6X cropped factor masking for extra reach. 6 or 7 fps with excellent dampening would be fine. Better stills auto-focus a la the &7D2, full 4K video with much improved (over even 7D2 or 70D) on chip continuous autofocus, maybe no line skipping, raw out, low to no aliasing or other DSLR video defects, the best possible file packet and compression algorithms, and a wider choice of higher frame rates would be about right for video. Fantasy? Maybe. But, would I buy it for around $3,500 or less? Definitely.


----------



## scottkinfw (Sep 27, 2014)

+1
Of curse, resolution is good, but I also want to see a significant improvement in image quality. I would like to see the "Canon sensors are far behind "(fill in the blank manufacturers)complainers finally shut up already.



Gino said:


> I'd like Canon to keep the 5D Mark IV in the 24-30MP range. If they produce a higher resolution camera, then it should be a separate camera line....3D.
> 
> My 5D Mark IV wish list:
> 
> ...


----------



## K-amps (Sep 27, 2014)

I'd prefer more sensitive center AF points... would a -5EV point be possible?


----------



## Khalai (Sep 27, 2014)

K-amps said:


> I'd prefer more sensitive center AF points... would a -5EV point be possible?



What for? -3 EV is already something like moonlit scenes


----------



## skoobey (Sep 27, 2014)

Not at this time, no. I would need something more than just mpix update.


----------



## vic20 (Sep 27, 2014)

I voted "maybe , if price comes down " 

but it is unlikely that I will buy it .
There is a VERY big chance of me getting a 5D3 once the price drops on that !


----------



## Maiaibing (Sep 27, 2014)

Khalai said:


> K-amps said:
> 
> 
> > I'd prefer more sensitive center AF points... would a -5EV point be possible?
> ...



Lack of AF capability in low light was a main reason I never bought the 5DIII after thorough real world testing.


----------



## moreorless (Sep 27, 2014)

The interesting question for me would be if Canon came up with a new camera line for high resolution should it be priced above or below the 5D line? most of what I'v heard tends to suggest people think it would be above but really I would argue that high resolution may actually be more price sensitive. I think your talking a lot of amateur landscape shooters there and even when your talking pro its often people without massive incomes.

My shot in the dark quess would be that the 5D4 will have a lot of video functionality stuff like 4K, dual pixel AF, tilt/flip screen, hybrid OVF/EVF, etc.


----------



## Maximilian (Sep 28, 2014)

Gino said:


> My 5D Mark IV wish list:
> 
> * 24-30MP
> * Dual Compact Flash card slots


I suppose you mean dual CFast 2.0 
Then I'm with you


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 28, 2014)

Khalai said:


> K-amps said:
> 
> 
> > I'd prefer more sensitive center AF points... would a -5EV point be possible?
> ...



Very low af sensitivity does make sense when you're using flash and don't want to disturb the scene with pre-flashes just to make the camera autofocus. The alternative, projecting a grid, is also disruptive and way too slow for scenes with movement.

ith the 6d, I shot an event in very poor lighting, but with my 3 flashes - good results, but with my old 60d (only af to 0.5lv) it wouldn't have been possible even though the iso was just a 800 or 1600.


----------



## Khalai (Sep 28, 2014)

Marsu42 said:


> Khalai said:
> 
> 
> > K-amps said:
> ...



That I understand, I was just wondering about -5 EV sensitivity. Not that I was anti-progress, but -5 EV seems like an overkill. My 6D with -3 EV is doing just fine even in dimly lit churches and after dusk


----------



## Marsu42 (Sep 28, 2014)

Khalai said:


> That I understand, I was just wondering about -5 EV sensitivity. Not that I was anti-progress, but -5 EV seems like an overkill. My 6D with -3 EV is doing just fine even in dimly lit churches and after dusk



The big - and yet unanswered - question is: If your camera's *capability* is up to -5lv, would it af *faster* at "just" -3lv than a camera which is maxed out at this value? Please do post a link if you know anyone who tested this with the -2lv 5d3 vs. the -3lv 6d.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 28, 2014)

too rich for me.....


----------



## Maiaibing (Sep 28, 2014)

moreorless said:


> The interesting question for me would be if Canon came up with a new camera line for high resolution should it be priced above or below the 5D line?



Since Nikon is undercutting Canon's current prices (in fact the new Nikon D750 looks very much like a strong 5DIII competitor on the specs and only costs 2.300$) Canon could hardly bring anything on the market with much less than 36 MP costing much more than 3.300$ without getting flak for being either under-performing or over-priced.

If Canon brings us a 8.000$ camera as their answer to Nikon's 3.300$ D810 I for one would "save" the money, buy a D750 and D810 and use the balance to sell my current Canon line-up for Nikon's equivalent. YMMV.


----------



## Joe M (Sep 28, 2014)

More pixels don't interest me for what I'm shooting. I have a decent amount of resolution and enough room for a tad of cropping if and when needed. There are things far more important than the number of pixels (once you hit a certain point as certainly if it was a 10mpx camera I would be asking for more). We need better performing sensors, not ones crammed with more pixels. A specialty camera for those who need it would be fine but the 5D4 I'll bet won't have probably more than 24 and that's fine. I sure wouldn't mind faster second card slot, higher flash sync speed (1/200...really? that's the best you can do Canon?), better metering so I don't have to work as hard. It's all moot though as unless the IQ is a dramatic improvement, I'm not sure I'll upgrade. We'll have to wait to see if Canon takes a step or a leap with the next version.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 28, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> If Canon brings us a 8.000$ camera as their answer to Nikon's 3.300$ D810 I for one would "save" the money, buy a D750 and D810 and use the balance to sell my current Canon line-up for Nikon's equivalent. YMMV.



If Canon brings an $8K high MP body as 'the answer' to Nikon's much less expensive FF option, that would be taking a page from Nikon's book, right? Was the D3x 'the answer' to Canon's 5D Mark II? If not, then neither is a high MP 1-series body Canon's answer to the D810. Or if you prefer, Nikon waited 4 years to 'answer' the 5DII with the D800...


----------



## sb in ak (Sep 28, 2014)

The 5D3 represents a great all around full framer. I'd be interested in high MP if it doesn't mean sacrificing speed, high ISO quality, etc. The 5D3 is about perfect, really. I don't see a big reason to upgrade, but I wouldn't mind having a few more pixels for cropping and a little more dyanamic range. 

To be honest, I need to keep honing my eye and filling in holes in my lens collection. I think that'd be a lot more beneficial than owning a 5DIV.


----------



## Murilo_mms (Sep 28, 2014)

My wish list for 5d4:

- better high iso (In my opinion it is ok until 6400, but I want a real improvement)
- improved metering system (like 7DII)

I came from Nikon (D700, D3s, D4) and the only thing that realy annoys me is the spot metering system of 5D3.


----------



## Maiaibing (Sep 28, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> Or if you prefer, Nikon waited 4 years to 'answer' the 5DII with the D800...



You're absolutely right. And during all that time Nikon users were really frustrated. 

Sadly I can relate to that feeling now.


----------



## Sabalok (Sep 28, 2014)

I am waiting for a high MP camera from Canon for a loooong time.


----------



## Zv (Sep 29, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> moreorless said:
> 
> 
> > The interesting question for me would be if Canon came up with a new camera line for high resolution should it be priced above or below the 5D line?
> ...



Are they? I don't think so. Definitely not in Japan. D610 is the same price as the 6D, the D810 is more than the 5D3 and D4s is also way more than a 1DX (also see CR latest post about discounted 1DX offers). Maybe it's different in other countries - I wouldn't know but undercutting sounds like BS to me. 

Source - amazon.jp


----------



## Maiaibing (Sep 29, 2014)

Zv said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > moreorless said:
> ...


It was not a general comment - if you care to read the original post (which you seem not to have done)

I specifically answered to how current Nikon models compare with the 5DIII and what this may indicate for the price of a possible high MP Canon 5DIV - where I pointed to the fact that the Nikon D750 which is very closely specked to match the 5DIII is far cheaper (also in Japan) while the D810 obviously has the MP the 5DIII does not. Leading to my conclusion that "Canon could hardly bring anything on the market with much less than 36 MP costing much more than 3.300$ without getting flak for being either under-performing or over-priced."

[Apart from that Amazon.jp is not a good place to get current info on Japanese camera and lens prices as their prices sometimes are far from the best.]


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Sep 29, 2014)

sb in ak said:


> The 5D3 represents a great all around full framer.



In my opinion, this represents the best summation of the 5DIII.

It is possible to find other cameras that can do something specifically better than the 5DIII. But as a total package, for a wide span of photography, the 5DIII is an excellent camera system.


----------



## NancyP (Sep 29, 2014)

Yes, if this were to be the equal to the Nikon 810 or whatever the current "best" 135-format landscape camera would be at the time. Otherwise, not. I am getting pretty good results from the 6D.


----------



## tron (Sep 29, 2014)

AcutancePhotography said:


> sb in ak said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D3 represents a great all around full framer.
> ...


+1

I do hope that 5DIV will continue filling that role too. Better IQ, Better Low and High ISO performance better DR, latest AF, maybe 7-8 fps and ... same MPixel count  

Plus the same Mpixel will probably be good for video lovers (I am not) since it will allow the 3x3 pixel binning (probably with more capabilities).


----------



## Zv (Sep 29, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > Maiaibing said:
> ...



Well of course the D750 is cheaper than the 5DIII, it's about 18 months late to the game.  if it were priced same as the 5DIII no one would buy it. Plus those who waited have already bought a perfectly good D800, D800E, D810 or even made do with a D610. So now this comes along and has to compete with all that so it's priced to match. 

So you are judging the future price of a mythical camera on the difference between these two cameras?? And you jumped to the conclusion that it would be $8000?? That don't add up at all. Based on the difference between the D750 and 5DIII the high megapixel Canon offering would be about $700 or $800 more than what the (then old) D8xx would be. New vs old? Hmmm, Well that seems reasonable, don't you think?


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Sep 29, 2014)

unfocused said:


> I am guessing that Canon will not abandon that audience but rather try to develop features that continues to give wedding and event photographers using canon a competitive advantage. It seems to me the biggest problem these photographers have today is that brides want pictures up on Facebook immediately (as in before the ceremony ends) and their friends can do it with their cellphones more quickly than the person they are paying to shoot the wedding can do it. The first manufacturer who can help pro photographers get images posted to social media as quickly and seamlessly as the wedding guest using an iPhone will have a winner in the marketplace. That's the sort of thing that will sell cameras, not megapixels, dynamic range, etc.



At first glance, I was onboard with that idea, but after thinking about it I have completely changed my mind. Everyone knows camera phone pictures are quickly digested. They are visual fast food. I wouldn't want to associate my photography with that, nevermind the fact that directly uploaded images won't be properly edited. I think it's _good_ that couples are waiting to see their *professional pictures*. It's an implicit demonstration that a lot of work goes into creating them. Additionally, I rarely see a bride on her phone during her wedding, so at best her friends will see it. And anyone who still has a Facebook page for their business knows what a profit hungry platform it is now, forcing you to "boost" page posts to get them seem. So, even if you do get them uploaded quickly it'll only be to a limited audience. Long story short, pro photogs shouldn't be worried about competing with camera phones. If a bride really wants to see her pictures right away, she can pay extra for a reception slideshow. 

All that being said, the 5D IV sure as heck better have wifi/NFC built in. They can do some good ol' fashioned engineering and move around the supposed obstacles.


----------



## Maiaibing (Sep 29, 2014)

Zv said:


> Based on the difference between the D750 and 5DIII the high megapixel Canon offering would be about $700 or $800 more than what the (then old) D8xx would be.



It seems you have lost yourself in misreading this thread.

To make it simple: My guess a high MP 5DIV would be in the same price range as the 5DII and 5DIII at their respective launch.


----------



## Zv (Sep 30, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> Zv said:
> 
> 
> > Based on the difference between the D750 and 5DIII the high megapixel Canon offering would be about $700 or $800 more than what the (then old) D8xx would be.
> ...



Wow thank you for putting me right. I am soooo dumb sometimes.


----------



## eml58 (Sep 30, 2014)

Zv said:


> Maiaibing said:
> 
> 
> > Zv said:
> ...



Love it.

I don't think there's any possible chance a high MP Canon Body won't come at a premium over competition, wether it's a 1D body (more likely I feel) or a 5DMK IVx Body, Canon will not kill the 5D goose, it's been the mainstay dslr for them for some years, Canon may offer a variant of the 5DMK IV as a higher MP sensor/body, but I doubt it, my guess would be an entirely new 5D style body with high MP sensor, or a 1DXs variant.

Either way in keeping with Canon's penchant for higher priced gear than the competition, there's little doubt the Canon challenge to the a7r/D800/D810, will be quite a bit more expensive.

And unless Canon drop a sensor of the 45/50 MP range into that Camera, they will almost certainly find them selves once again caught out when both Nikon & Sony come through in 2015 with high MP bodies sporting the Sony 50MP sensor currently in the phase One & Pentax 645z.

With regards the original Poll Question, I'll reserve my hopes & dreams of a high MP Canon Body in the form of my much loved 1Dx, if Canon do this, I'll have the best of both worlds, 1Dx + 1Dxs, Oh Joy, I can palm off the a7r, stop drooling over the Phase One & 645z, and climb gracefully back into my "only Canon will do" bed.

But like "Zv" I can be sooooo dumb sometimes, what do I know.


----------



## AdamF (Sep 30, 2014)

Yes I would buy.


----------



## ScubaX (Sep 30, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> The question is hypothetical and presumes
> 
> 1) a 5DIV would improve generically on the 5DIII but with a significant MP boost (at least 32MP compared to the existing 22MP for the 5DIII)
> 
> 2) the price range of such a camera would follow the pattern of the 5D-family (around 3.500$ at launch)



Since you qualified the poll with "5DIV would improve generically on the 5DIII", I would probably not upgrade unless things such as IQ, DR, FPS, buffer speed, Focus points and types etc improved.

I like the idea of increased MP for larger prints, but that alone will not sell me one. 

I just do not care about 4k video and nothing I own even uses 4K, not my TV nor my computer monitor. The 5D3 is just too heavy for video that I do without buying a grand or more worth of stabilizing arms. I take video for fun with an iPhone, otherwise I take photos.


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Oct 8, 2014)

Think Doris Day said it best - que sera, sera. There is surely room for improvements in the current line because technology marches on, but I am more concerned with Canon's planning wizards packing it with video features,
wi-fi connectivity, and perhaps in-camera editing at the expense of still photo capabilities. Faster dual media cards are surely a continued requirement, better low light performance, faster autofocus all seem to take priority in my world over a 40-50% jump in pixel availability.


----------



## dgatwood (Oct 8, 2014)

By contrast, I'll consider it if it has Wi-Fi, GPS, and DPAF for video. I don't use video that often, but I do periodically find myself using live view to get shots that would otherwise be much harder, so DPAF matters. I don't use Wi-Fi all the time, but it is nice to have in a pinch, when you don't want to pull out a proper remote. And none of those things negatively impact still photography in any way, so leaving them out would be just plain silly.


----------



## Woody (Oct 8, 2014)

I am keen on a 46 MP EOS 5D Mk IV (or better still EOS 6D Mk 2). Reason is simple: I get to crop down to 18 MP APS-C size. So I effectively get 46 MP FF and 18 MP APS-C cameras in 1 package. Sounds good. ;D

But I may change my mind if this really happens. ;D


----------



## Maiaibing (Oct 8, 2014)

eml58 said:


> Either way in keeping with Canon's penchant for higher priced gear than the competition, there's little doubt the Canon challenge to the a7r/D800/D810, will be quite a bit more expensive.



I am not sure why you conclude that Canon is usually more expensive. My perception is different. Canon used to be both better and cheaper and only recently lost that lead.

Both 5DI and 5DII where far lower priced than anything remotely compatible from Nikon. The same has been true for the Rebel series for a long time. 70D - Canon's best selling DSLR for a while - also seems very competitive. It was only after the event of the D800 shortly after the launch of 5DIII that Nikon suddenly seemingly leapfrogged Canon on both price and innovation.


----------



## eml58 (Oct 8, 2014)

Maiaibing said:


> eml58 said:
> 
> 
> > Either way in keeping with Canon's penchant for higher priced gear than the competition, there's little doubt the Canon challenge to the a7r/D800/D810, will be quite a bit more expensive.
> ...



Ok, let's look at what I use and it may give some idea of why I have the opinion that Canon gear is generally more expensive than nearest equivalent Nikon gear.

I currently own 1Dx, 5DMK III (The 1Dx was at release, much more expensive than the D4, the 5DMK III at release was much more expensive than the D800)

Currently list priced
1Dx $6799/D4 $5999/D4s $6499
5DMK III $3399/D800 $2999/D810 $3299

I currently own & use (among others) these Canon Lenses 200f/2, 300f/2.8 II, 200-400f/4, 600f/4 & I sold my 400f/2.8 II last year.

Current list prices
Canon 200f/2 $5999
Nikon 200f/2 $5999

Canon 300f/2.8II $6599
Nikon 300f/2.8 $5899

Canon 400f/2.8II $10499
Nikon 400f/2.8 $ 9549

Canon 200-400f/4 $11799 (Yes, it has a built in 1.4x)
Nikon 200-400f/4 II $6999 (1.4x costs $400 ??)

Canon 600f/4II$11999
Nikon 600f/4 $10299

This "Trend" of Canon's being more expensive has been in place for a while now, I won't argue that the generally newer developed Canon Whites have an IQ advantage over the equivalent Nikon Lenses, but that argument doesn't wash with friends that use nikon, I prefer the Canon set up, and I've tried the Nikon set up (D800/D3x/D4).

What Canon "used to be" is to me less important than where Canon are today, they are more expensive, in the gear that I use, how they fit in the Market segments that I don't use is of zero importance to me.

In the area of FF Camera Bodies, and generally Long Lenses, Canon are more expensive, certainly more than Nikon & Sony, again, in many cases for good reason in particular over Sony, Sony have developed amazingly good Sensors & their Camera bodies are trending smaller, but usability, Lens line up etc is poor in comparison to Nikon/canon.


----------



## zim (Oct 8, 2014)

tomscott said:


> The 5D line has always been an event photographers camera and thats who buys them. The files as they are are a good size, making the MP 30+will increase the files by a 1/3 and after editing a raw and saving it as a PSD they are already in the 250mb range which is more than enough. You can only fit 1000 images on a 32gb card so at a typical wedding your shooting 64gbs as it is shooting redundancy is 128gb. It basically means more money to be spent on storage reducing profit margins. When your not printing past A2 or even A1 that space is wasted. Granted it gives you room to crop, but most event shooters don't shoot to crop just adds time in post.
> 
> its not a landscape camera and most event shooters don't need that kind of resolution.
> 
> ...



+10000 and that's what my money (literally) is on


----------



## tomscott (Oct 8, 2014)

The 5DMKIII price announcement was a shocker and tainted the camera for a long time. People really were angry especially with the D800 announcement being cheaper and a more advanced sensor. Although I still think the 5DMKIII is a better camera.

Didn't stop me from being excited but I certainly waited a year for the price to drop. A lot of early adopters were pretty annoyed that the price dropped a lot in the first 12 months.

Another few - the 70-200mm MKII and the 24-70mm MKII, I waited 3 years for the 70-200mm to come to a decent price. Although the 24-70 is now reduced I still don't think its quite worth the money especially when the competition and the previous gen is 50% cheaper.

Don't get me wrong they are probably the best zoom lenses available, but the price hike was a lot!

Signs of a turn around? 16-35mm F4 IS being pretty reasonably priced. Price reductions in the US which seem to have been completely ignored in Europe. Meaning the UK £ and US $ prices are the same yet the pound is 60p to the dollar so were still paying 1/3 more for the same gear meaning UK retailers going bust because of huge savings on imports with the likes of Digitalrev and Slrhut and still giving 1 year warranties.

Hopefully Canon has turned slightly with its price strategy.


----------



## davidcl0nel (Oct 8, 2014)

tomscott said:


> Meaning the UK £ and US $ prices are the same yet the pound is 60p to the dollar so were still paying 1/3 more for the same gear



As always: The price in US is without sales tax, in Europe with, so please add the 18% (UK) or more tax to the price, if you want a fair comparison... Yes, it's more expensive, but not 1/3 more...


----------



## tron (Oct 8, 2014)

zim said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > The 5D line has always been an event photographers camera and thats who buys them. The files as they are are a good size, making the MP 30+will increase the files by a 1/3 and after editing a raw and saving it as a PSD they are already in the 250mb range which is more than enough. You can only fit 1000 images on a 32gb card so at a typical wedding your shooting 64gbs as it is shooting redundancy is 128gb. It basically means more money to be spent on storage reducing profit margins. When your not printing past A2 or even A1 that space is wasted. Granted it gives you room to crop, but most event shooters don't shoot to crop just adds time in post.
> ...


I agree and I would love seeing a new 5DMkIV with same Mpixels, increased DR, lower noise, even higher ISO capabilities and 1 or2 fps more and the new AF of 7DII. Plus some basic firmware related tweeks like Auto ISO in manual mode just like 1Dx's. As I have 2 5DMkIIIs and no other camera I use them for everything.

OK: 1. I am an amateur and 2. I do not need to shoot sports.

But: 5DMkIII does well for landscapes (yes, landscapes), portraits, events and astrophotography.


----------



## telemaq76 (Oct 8, 2014)

i ll buy if the high iso quality is same or better than 5d3 AND the low iso quality of the 1ds3. I ll be happy with that. Low iso of 5d3 is that bad compared to a 1ds3 or a d800


----------



## Skirball (Oct 8, 2014)

Either go all the way and give wildlife photographers something they can crop (1DX2), or keep it cheaper with a 6D2. Buildings and landscape don't need 65 point AF.


----------

