5d4 arrival and spec question?

5d4 arrival and spec question?

27 posts
14 Nov 2014
profilepictures
Photographer
profilepictures
Anyone heard anything about the timing of the 5d4? I heard a whisper of Feb '15. The other question is what additional spec could it have over the mk3 and what cost? My guess is a push for the gap between 1 series and the current 5 series, but honestly I can't guess at what extra facility it might have that'd be significantly an improvement?

Posted 15 Nov 2014
magpie1
Photographer
magpie1
Something I've been wondering. If/when it arrives it will be, initially relatively expensive! Canon of late seem to want to have a strong 'option' for video in their cameras, perhaps market research indicates this and I suppose the tendency to bias toward the market has to prevail over, say, a camera purely for still photographers. Compared to the competition and one has to mention the Sony chipped Nikon 810, sensor wise Canon are behind on resolution, but I'm not sure 36+MP I'd be happy with 25-30 but the crucial area IMHO is dynamic range. Canon will probably introduce on sensor focus detection.
Body wise it would be nice if they recalled their heritage and called them 3 series which was their between the flagship 1 and consumer 5, but more likely 5D4.


Posted 15 Nov 2014
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
I'd rather have more dynamic range (eg. 16-bit raw rather than 14-bit) than more pixels, especially bearing in mind that many lenses cannot resolve better than the equivalent of ~20mpix anyway.

Another rumour I heard was that Canon may go the way of Red with a modular camera system. This may be how the 1-series would go to separate from the rest of their cameras. I remember when the F-1 was their flagship they had an advert that showed it alongside all of the various modular accessories (prisms, motor drives, data backs, extended film holders etc. etc.) so it's nothing new for them.

Posted 15 Nov 2014
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
One thing that has annoyed me in recent years though is how prices are holding. When I bought my mk1 there was a considerable price drop between its release and the last couple of months of its life. To my knowledge there's been no drop in price with the mk3 (or much of drop for the mk2 when that was on sale IIRC). One thing they have done though is that there's a recent promotion to bundle one of their obscenely expensive battery grips with it, this is usually a good sign that there's a new one in the pipeline.

Posted 15 Nov 2014
IainT
Photographer
IainT
I've often wondered who benefits from all the "advances" in technology...well the manufacturers obviously. Because people are gullible enough to buy into the least "improvement"

The way I see it, Canon may have advanced in technology but the actual quality of the product has deteriorated since the Mk1 5D

The 5D Mk 1 was a major breakthrough and is a total photographic icon in my opinion.

Now the only real difference between the models is price. A £350 650D does pretty much the same job as a 2K 5D mk3 there is an unbelievably small difference.

I've given up on the 5D as pointless. I do most of my work with a 70D with a 6D as back up where I have a small set and need full frame. Oh and a 650D as further back up in case they both break on the same day.

Posted 15 Nov 2014
magpie1
Photographer
magpie1
It is, as well, very much the end usage that can be a big determining factor. I agree, very much with IainT, that if something is good enough, it stays good enough. If end usage is screen based, then the limitations of screen quality is very much the determining factor rather than the camera, indeed one wonders how many people shoot full raw on 810's and never do any more than load 2MB sRGB files to sites like this and others!
On the other hand if prints, particularly large 'Art' (not going to define) prints are the end product, then camera/sensor performance is much more important.

Posted 15 Nov 2014
profilepictures
Photographer
profilepictures
Gullible might come into it, after all, how many high performance cars seldom if ever see their owners take them to the limits? Certainly I've never seen mine at its maximum speed having gone way past the legal limit.

iSO is the grail I chase though, and the improvements in my short camera history between owning the 5d ( tartan flavoured banding noise anyone?) And current 6d are entirely obvious and beneficial. I tend to push my photography based on low light capability and the next improvement in this is something I'll want, and use daily fully every time the camera comes out.

In good light with limited movement, sure, lots of cameras are adequate.

I'm hoping the dual pixel focus thing isn't included, using a 70d reveals its great for video but struggles facing into the sun and misses focus 50% in those situations on still.

Posted 15 Nov 2014
HowardJ
Photographer
HowardJ
I tend to agree that the 5D isn't really worth the money now. I've been trying out a Fuji x-series in parallel with my 5D mk II and it delivers great results at less than half the cost. The only issue is the handling can be a bit difficult due to the smaller size. I might have to go to the X-T1 to get a battery grip to fix that.

Posted 15 Nov 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
HowardJ

I tend to agree that the 5D isn't really worth the money now. I've been trying out a Fuji x-series in parallel with my 5D mk II and it delivers great results at less than half the cost. The only issue is the handling can be a bit difficult due to the smaller size. I might have to go to the X-T1 to get a battery grip to fix that.


I still prefer the (Raw) files from my 5D (Mk 1) to those from my Fuji XE-1 at low ISO settings.  Yes at higher ISO the Fuji wins - but not by as much as you might think especially as I think they overstate the ISO sensitivity a little!
Posted 15 Nov 2014
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
I'd personally be happy with something less high-spec but at the very least with X-type sensors across the board. IMO not having x-type sensors on the outer points is the main thing letting the 6D down (not the number of points) in terms of use with stills photography.

The problem with video incorporation is that it costs next to nothing to add and so it's understanding that the manufacturers push hard to market it as a bonus feature.

Posted 15 Nov 2014
HowardJ
Photographer
HowardJ
mph
I still prefer the (Raw) files from my 5D (Mk 1) to those from my Fuji XE-1 at low ISO settings.  Yes at higher ISO the Fuji wins - but not by as much as you might think especially as I think they overstate the ISO sensitivity a little!
I agree my 5D mk I was my favourite.
Posted 15 Nov 2014
mph
Photographer
mph
Just for interest these are crops from similar Canon and Fuji shots at 1600 ISO.  Not very scientific - but the difference in noise is noticeable - though no noise reduction has been done and these were Raw conversions not SOCC jpegs.



Posted 15 Nov 2014
anthonyh
Photographer
anthonyh
HowardJ

I agree my 5D mk I was my favourite.


My 5D1 is my fav digital camera for studio work...I have never seen the point of amateurs spending a fortune on exotic gear. Having said that...I bought a 1V HS a few years back. I think money is better spent on decent lenses.
Posted 15 Nov 2014
Edited by anthonyh 15 Nov 2014
Chandos
Photographer
Chandos
I'm surprise dSLR is still around today. My video camera IQ in areas of DR and latitude in grading can easily exceed my 5D2 and I actually prefer using stills from it.

Posted 15 Nov 2014
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
Chandos

I'm surprise dSLR is still around today. My video camera IQ in areas of DR and latitude in grading can easily exceed my 5D2 and I actually prefer using stills from it.


Video cameras are a different tool for a different purpose, hence the reason many stills photographers would rather the manufacturers concentrate on stills capability of SLRs rather than video capability.
Posted 15 Nov 2014
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join