# First studio tests with Canon 5D IV



## AlanF (Aug 29, 2016)

DPR have the first images on in its comparator:

https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison?attr18=daylight&attr13_0=canon_eos5dmkiv&attr13_1=canon_eos5dmkiii&attr13_2=nikon_d810&attr13_3=sony_a7rii&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=100&attr16_1=100&attr16_2=100&attr16_3=100&attr171_3=off&normalization=full&widget=1&x=0&y=0

DR measurements promised to follow shortly.

DPR is a troll's paradise.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 29, 2016)

But....its fuzzier than everything else out there. 
This thing is going to bomb worse than a bomb dropping on a bombing range. 

SAVE YOUR MONEY EVERYBODY AND BUY A 1200D...! 12 OF THEM...


----------



## privatebydesign (Aug 29, 2016)

Mikehit said:


> But....its fuzzier than everything else out there.
> This thing is going to bomb worse than a bomb dropping on a bombing range.
> 
> SAVE YOUR MONEY EVERYBODY AND BUY A 1200D...! 12 OF THEM...



No, the implication is clear, buy a Sony, any Sony, or a Nikon D810, they are the only cameras worth buying and are the answer to every photographic question, ever.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 29, 2016)

Seems a bit odd the image with the 5D3 arguably appears to look the same or better (in terms of sharpness and noise) than the 5D4 ....


----------



## Deleted member 378221 (Aug 29, 2016)

PureClassA said:


> Seems a bit odd the image with the 5D3 arguably appears to look the same or better (in terms of sharpness and noise) than the 5D4 ....


Well, not everywhere. See here and here for example. Lots more Detail with the 5D4 than the 5D3. 

Also the 5D4 gets a lot sharper than the 5D4 when you check the "compared size" option. I don't know how that is. Of course it's going to get sharper reducing the filesize, but why does it suddenly surpass the 5D3 when it looks a bit soft at full resolution?


----------



## justsomedude (Aug 29, 2016)

PureClassA said:


> Seems a bit odd the image with the 5D3 arguably appears to look the same or better (in terms of sharpness and noise) than the 5D4 ....



I noticed that as well... especially if you switch to RAW and look at the Jack of Hearts in the playing cards at 100 ISO. Almost seems OOF. Something isn't right, for sure, but is it the 5D4 or the lens? In the Nikon and Sony you can see the texture of the card material in the heart-shape... the 5D4 is just a blurry mess.


----------



## cazza132 (Aug 29, 2016)

I am very impressed! ISO6400 and above leaves the D810, 5DIII and A7RII in the dust! Have a look at the orange and red sewing threads. If the 7DII low levels of long exposure dark noise is anything to go by, this could be my next astro cam! I think there's 1/2 a stop improvement in luma and chroma noise over any other competitor over ISO1600. Let's see how the shadow pushes go. An improvement on pixel level - a huge achievement and a sizable improvement globally.


----------



## PureClassA (Aug 29, 2016)

Things that are STILL silly with these DPR charts.

Nikon body get tested with a $1600 top shelf lens

Canon bodies get the $350 lens...(As usual, and yes I know the little 85 is a good lens, I own one, but still..) 

5D4 shot is at 7.1. All other 3 cameras at 5.6.

I'm not lens and aperture picking per se, I'm questioning the seemingly sloppy methods here


----------



## Deleted member 378221 (Aug 29, 2016)

PureClassA said:


> 5D4 shot is at 7.1. All other 3 cameras at 5.6.


Really? Not saying you are wrong, but the ones I checked were 5.6 across the board. I'd be interested if you could point me to an f7.1 shot.


----------



## docsmith (Aug 29, 2016)

Check the "club" in Queen of clubs RAW, ISO 6400 and ISO 12,800.

Is that banding I see in a Sony sensor while a Canon sensor is still looking pretty clean????


----------



## Sporgon (Aug 29, 2016)

PureClassA said:


> Things that are STILL silly with these DPR charts.
> 
> Nikon body get tested with a $1600 top shelf lens
> 
> ...



More to the point: the 85 and 100 were designed in the early 90s for film. But there is definitely a blurr starting from mid frame, especially upper right. Perhaps Rishi will log in and explain......


----------



## cazza132 (Aug 29, 2016)

Look at the orange and red threads of the sewing string rolls at ISO6400+! 5DIV is a clear winner!


----------



## 3kramd5 (Aug 29, 2016)

PureClassA said:


> Things that are STILL silly with these DPR charts.
> 
> Nikon body get tested with a $1600 top shelf lens
> 
> ...



Yah but if they put s new lens on, they'd have to go back and re-test all the canon bodies, some of which they may not even have access to anymore, else they'd invalidate comparisons within brand (where they're arguably most useful).


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 29, 2016)

docsmith said:


> Check the "club" in Queen of clubs RAW, ISO 6400 and ISO 12,800.
> 
> Is that banding I see in a Sony sensor while a Canon sensor is still looking pretty clean????



Looks like it to me. I am thinking at times it looks like more aggressive sharpening in the A7 and possibly D810 images. 
And I wonder how refined the Adobe algorithms are for the 5DIV images, or if there is still some development to go?


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 29, 2016)

cazza132 said:


> Look at the orange and red threads of the sewing string rolls at ISO6400+! 5DIV is a clear winner!



I swapped 5D3 for the 1DX2 and the A7R for the Nikon D5 at 6400. 
The D810 is a clear loser on that one - after that they are all much of a muchness.


----------



## tr573 (Aug 29, 2016)

PureClassA said:


> Things that are STILL silly with these DPR charts.
> 
> Nikon body get tested with a $1600 top shelf lens
> 
> ...



@ 5.6, the 85/1.8 resolves as much as you could possibly ever want. I really don't see it as a reason to complain here. 

I think all the armchair scientists diagnosing 1/3 stop differences in ISO noise via images on a website are hilarious though.


----------



## xps (Aug 30, 2016)

PureClassA said:


> Things that are STILL silly with these DPR charts.
> 
> Nikon body get tested with a $1600 top shelf lens
> 
> ...



Where can you see, which lens has been used for testing?
This is definitively an bias. Especially, if some competetiors get tested with high-end lenses.
On the other side, I am lucky, if my old 85mm is as good as  One plus for Canon, when even cheap lenses are optically as good.


----------



## Mikehit (Aug 30, 2016)

xps said:


> PureClassA said:
> 
> 
> > Things that are STILL silly with these DPR charts.
> ...



Hover the cursor over the 'i' button bottom right of each panel and the deails, including lens used, pop up


----------



## docsmith (Aug 30, 2016)

docsmith said:


> Check the "club" in Queen of clubs RAW, ISO 6400 and ISO 12,800.
> 
> Is that banding I see in a Sony sensor while a Canon sensor is still looking pretty clean????



Looking at it more closely, I am wondering if the cards are textured. But, regarding noise, I am impressed by the 5DIII and very impressed with the 5DIV in comparison.


----------



## Mancubus (Aug 30, 2016)

These tests never mean much for me, but to be honest the 5d4 shots don't look better than the 5d3, I'd say they look equally good, and clearly inferior to the A7RII.

Looking at he RAW iso 3200 (the highest I normally use), the red jack card, the 5d3 red and blue colors look clearly more vivid. I thought this was a resolution penalty, but no. The 5DSR has exactly the same colors as the 5d3.

For my use, if it is as sharp and clean as the 5d3 I'm already happy. Add some improvements like shadows recovery and focus adjustment in post and I'm sold. But definitely not impressed by anything I saw in these studio tests.


----------



## Dylan777 (Aug 30, 2016)

Mark my words, 5d4 will sell like a hot cake, especially when the price in $3K or slightly below


----------

