Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
Thread started 24 Aug 2016 (Wednesday) 21:29
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 5D Mark IV -- Time to Discuss!

 
AnnieMacD
Oops, me again
Avatar
3,809 posts
Gallery: 698 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 8081
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Applecross, Scotland
     
Sep 30, 2016 06:09 |  #3451

George Zip wrote in post #18144351 (external link)
Sounds like something is amiss.

I suck at BIF photos, in fact tried my first today and I didn't miss any where the bird was the target. I was using the 100-400 as well

George, they weren't in flight - just running around on the shore. If they were BIF I'd definitely put it down to user error.


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
George ­ Zip
My neighbours are looking at me a bit strangely
Avatar
1,394 posts
Gallery: 31 photos
Likes: 1968
Joined Aug 2015
     
Sep 30, 2016 06:22 |  #3452

AnnieMacD wrote in post #18144356 (external link)
George, they weren't in flight - just running around on the shore. If they were BIF I'd definitely put it down to user error.

That's weird. Are they really OOF or just marginally? Not that it really matters I guess OOF is OOF, and fairly static subjects should be 100% hit rate pretty much.

I have been amazed at the accuracy, and I am not particularly very good. Sounds like a bum camera considering the photos in your gallery.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mike
ugly when I'm sober
Avatar
15,397 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 385
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Canterbury/Ramsgate, UK
     
Sep 30, 2016 06:46 |  #3453

AnnieMacD wrote in post #18144344 (external link)
Well, I had a really disappointing day yesterday...

Oh no, DISLIKE!!!!!!:-(


www.mikegreenphotograp​hy.co.uk (external link)
Gear
UK South Easterners
flickr (external link) Insta1 (external link) Insta2 (external link)

A closed mouth gathers no foot.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,414 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 464
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Sep 30, 2016 07:02 |  #3454

MatthewK wrote in post #18143995 (external link)
I use FoCal to "get in the neighborhood", and usually end up fine adjusting after taking real world photos. The other day, when shooting a squirrel, it sat still long enough for me to shoot, chimp, MFA w/ my 100-400 + 1.4x.

As a software geek I use a "binary chop" method with DotTune: i.e. start at an extreme, then halve. E.g. -20 (assume no dot), -10 (got a dot, so go half way between -20 and -10), -15 (no dot, so go halfway between -15 and -10) and so on. Once I have a dot I'll change up and down by single units a few times to be certain I've got the edge of the range, then repeat for the "+" side. At worse it usually means you only have to test 4 or 5 settings at each side to find the edge.

MatthewK wrote in post #18143995 (external link)
So I turned DLO on in-camera, and sure enough, the changes ARE NOT applied to the RAW file when you import to LR. You still have to go into DPP and enable it for each photo. I guess the only benefit to this is feature being in-camera is that you can apply it and save as JPEG?

It does make a good difference though. Here is an example; on the left is LR and sharpening/detail/mask​ing applied, and on the right is a TIFF exported from DPP w/ DLO, and imported into LR for comparison. I tried to get the LR sharpening as similar as possible, but it took work, whereas the DLO was done in one button click. It's great, but going through DPP is cumbersome.

Oh, and the TIFF is 180MB :cry:

I have to admit that DLO does seem to make a difference. What would be nice would be a plug-in for Lightroom that could allow you to enable it (perhaps making a call to an installed copy of DPP to do the processing). Probably easier said than done though!

smythie wrote in post #18144067 (external link)
I believe (but haven't seen it work) that Nikon has implemented something like that on the D5 and D500. Could be wrong though

Yea; that rings a bell. I believe MagicLantern also do it. The daft thing is that it shouldn't be hard to implement from a firmware point of view; once the user has a focused chart and turned AF off it should take a matter of seconds for the camera to automatically go through each setting, find the ends of the range, and configure the middle value.

It would also mean you'd get a consistent judgement of what was a hit or not (for those times the dot flickers a bit).

Neilyb wrote in post #18144282 (external link)
Actually no, since the 1Dx2 has better DR over about ISO 800 (and way better noise control).
The 5D4 is really only a DR machine from ISO100-400. I am testing against my 1Dx (mk1) and find it is great at low ISO but the 1Dx takes over at ISO1250 (also noise wise on a 0 EV exposure), so for sure the 1Dx2 is a tad better than that (DxO scores are also showing this).

Question though: are you comparing noise by looking at both images zoomed to 100%, or comparing normalised images (i.e. two identically sized prints, both from the same amount of sensor area)?

There's a question a little earlier in this thread about AF performance of the 5D4 vs the 1Dx (Mk1). I must admit I'd be interested in the answer to that too - do you have a feel on how they compare?

George Zip wrote in post #18144359 (external link)
That's weird. Are they really OOF or just marginally? Not that it really matters I guess OOF is OOF, and fairly static subjects should be 100% hit rate pretty much.

I have been amazed at the accuracy, and I am not particularly very good. Sounds like a bum camera considering the photos in your gallery.

It could simply be that the new body is within tolerance, but moderately high (e.g. +10 in MFA terms), and so is the lens (e.g. +10). Put those two together and you're likely to see poor results out of the box. With a bit of MFA tuning it should be fine. If the 1D4 sample happened to be around -10 MFA out of the box, then it and the lens would work together perfectly with no adjustments. It's just fact of life with a separate phase AF sensor and a relatively shallow DOF.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Neilyb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,192 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 444
Joined Sep 2005
Location: Munich
     
Sep 30, 2016 07:44 |  #3455

sploo wrote in post #18144373 (external link)
Question though: are you comparing noise by looking at both images zoomed to 100%, or comparing normalised images (i.e. two identically sized prints, both from the same amount of sensor area)?

There's a question a little earlier in this thread about AF performance of the 5D4 vs the 1Dx (Mk1). I must admit I'd be interested in the answer to that too - do you have a feel on how they compare?

Re-sampling the image down to 18MP helps, with a little NR before hand, but from about ISO3200 this does not match the 1Dx, which is incredible for high ISO (mk2 is now even better). I need to do more scientific tests but no time to deal with both cameras :) I will see how the AF works this weekend hopefully, but the 1Dx is already pretty incredible. Of course having more AF points at F8 will come in handy.

Only real difference in noise "quality" when pulling 1Dx shadows is a slight tendency to band. I noticed this in a 5D4 image too (horizontal banding), ISO1600, but cannot find it in any other images. I will post some examples over the weekend.


http://natureimmortal.​blogspot.com (external link)

http://www.natureimmor​tal.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jonneymendoza
Goldmember
3,788 posts
Likes: 383
Joined Apr 2008
     
Sep 30, 2016 08:23 |  #3456

Colorblinded wrote in post #18143603 (external link)
I've seen quite a few forums rise and fall, but none seem like "what they used to be." Have they gone somewhere I don't know about, or is everyone just using Facebook now?

I really don't find Facebook to be a good replacement for sites like this.

who uses facebook for discussions etc?

Forums rule for geeks who dive into a proper convo about a topic or hobby.


Canon 5dmkIII | Canon 85L 1.2 | Sigma 35mm ART 1.4|Canon 16-35mm L 2.8 |Canon 24-70mm L f2.8 | Canon 70-200mm F2.8L MK2 | Canon 430EX MK2 Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jonneymendoza
Goldmember
3,788 posts
Likes: 383
Joined Apr 2008
     
Sep 30, 2016 08:36 |  #3457

sploo wrote in post #18143818 (external link)
It's simply the variability of manufacturing tolerances. The worst scenario is a guy who spends years building up a set of "perfect" lenses for his body - sometimes returning and replacing several lens copies until he gets a "good" one.

He then buys a new body, and all his lenses are soft; conclusion: the new camera is junk.

Likely the original body was just on the limit of acceptable tolerance (e.g. +20) and over the years he'd managed to find a number of lens samples that were "wrong" in the right direction (i.e. they cancelled one another out).

I suspect there'll be a fairly standard bell curve of bodies and lenses - where most are pretty close to 0; meaning that it's likely his new body is "good" (but all his lenses are now wrong) ;-)a

Point being: you might find that your 5D4 is on the money, the 200L is off, but all your other bodies were also off by the same amount (in the other direction). TBH +13 of correction is well within the -20...+20 range, so if it focuses accurately I wouldn't worry. Only if you had a lens that appeared to need >+20 would it be a problem.

Some years ago I downloaded one with a simple black and white target, but it also had a rule of measurements that you placed at 45 degrees to the target: you focus on the target, and the rule makes it easy to see if the camera is front or back focusing.

Note that phase AF has variability: if you turn the focus ring (so focus is way off) and then AF on a chart (and repeat several times) you won't get exactly the same focus each time (Liveview AF will usually be more consistent). This means that taking the traditional route of examining photos means you do need to take a bunch of shots to get a feel for whether a lens is front or back focusing. For that reason, I like the DotTune method.

This is one of themajor benefits of a mirrorless body. None of this AF issues.

I prey to god the next 5d goes mirrorless.

The tech will be there for a mirrorless body to have same performance as a DSLR. it is already very very close.


Canon 5dmkIII | Canon 85L 1.2 | Sigma 35mm ART 1.4|Canon 16-35mm L 2.8 |Canon 24-70mm L f2.8 | Canon 70-200mm F2.8L MK2 | Canon 430EX MK2 Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flashpoint99
Senior Member
411 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2012
     
Sep 30, 2016 08:43 |  #3458

jonneymendoza wrote in post #18144414 (external link)
This is one of themajor benefits of a mirrorless body. None of this AF issues.

I prey to god the next 5d goes mirrorless.

The tech will be there for a mirrorless body to have same performance as a DSLR. it is already very very close.


Youll only have to wait 4 more years to find out if Canon goes mirrorless then be disappointed because they purposely held back on features that should be standard for the days technology;-)a




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jonneymendoza
Goldmember
3,788 posts
Likes: 383
Joined Apr 2008
     
Sep 30, 2016 08:52 |  #3459

AnnieMacD wrote in post #18144344 (external link)
Well, I had a really disappointing day yesterday. My 5D4 arrived in the afternoon so I just set BBF, put the 100-400 II on it and off I went to the beach to look for a duck to photograph. I didn't find a duck but took about 150 images of plovers, seagulls, oystercatchers and redshanks. Excitedly uploaded to Lightroom and NOT ONE shot was in focus. Every one was front focussed by quite a margin, most taken at 400mm but some were not. I deleted the lot :-(:-(:-(

I had to work late but did take a few photos with different lenses late at night and they seem OK but will have to do more testing and MFA all my lenses. I was hoping to use the camera with 100-400 tomorrow for a shinty match but will just take my (new to me) 1D4 which is spot on with this lens straight out of the box. Then, next week I'll start again!

ahh thats crap!

im worried about mines. i need to test other lenses. The 85L mk2 was ok. Around 35% where out of focus but is it because the background was a window and i was inside shooting against it with a model standing infront of the window?

the 70-200 f2.8 mk2 lens was spot on. no AF complaints there


Canon 5dmkIII | Canon 85L 1.2 | Sigma 35mm ART 1.4|Canon 16-35mm L 2.8 |Canon 24-70mm L f2.8 | Canon 70-200mm F2.8L MK2 | Canon 430EX MK2 Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,087 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2773
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 30, 2016 09:04 |  #3460

AnnieMacD wrote in post #18144344 (external link)
Well, I had a really disappointing day yesterday. My 5D4 arrived in the afternoon so I just set BBF, put the 100-400 II on it and off I went to the beach to look for a duck to photograph. I didn't find a duck but took about 150 images of plovers, seagulls, oystercatchers and redshanks. Excitedly uploaded to Lightroom and NOT ONE shot was in focus. Every one was front focussed by quite a margin, most taken at 400mm but some were not. I deleted the lot :-(:-(:-(

I had to work late but did take a few photos with different lenses late at night and they seem OK but will have to do more testing and MFA all my lenses. I was hoping to use the camera with 100-400 tomorrow for a shinty match but will just take my (new to me) 1D4 which is spot on with this lens straight out of the box. Then, next week I'll start again!

You don't check your focus first on a new camera before you go out?


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,087 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2773
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
Post edited over 3 years ago by Talley.
     
Sep 30, 2016 09:16 |  #3461

Well I shot my sons baseball lats night with the 120-300 and the keeper rate went down. Without a doubt the 200L produces more keepers with or without a TC on. I am amazed how that 200L just doesn't miss. The 120-300 wasn't performing "exactly" the same. It still did good but I was having to change the tracking sensitivity to try to get it to stay locked on better.

I really think it's something to do with iTR mode though. Maybe it's not compatible or canon internally turns it off for non canon glass? The 120-300 nailed focus but it just wasn't consistently in the face like the 200L was... when using all AF points on the kids while them running toward the camera. iTR is active during this point and I've seen it concentrate on the face before but the 120-300 didn't seem like it wanted to... mainly stayed on the waist area.

Mind you... I use different methods for different things but comparing how I shot the last 4 games with the 200L vs me shooting yesterday in good light with the 120-300 I can see a difference.

Now as far as the IQ the 120-300 is performing really really good on the 5D4. The images are very sharp and the overal look is great. I've used this lens for almost 3 years now but it's time to let go. The 200L is fitting my needs just fine and is providing me a more versatile kit with TCs. Speaking of TCs I just did a trade plus cash on my V2 for a V3 so looking forward to having the V3 back in my hands.


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,414 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 464
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Sep 30, 2016 10:38 as a reply to  @ Talley's post |  #3462

Neilyb wrote in post #18144391 (external link)
Re-sampling the image down to 18MP helps, with a little NR before hand, but from about ISO3200 this does not match the 1Dx, which is incredible for high ISO (mk2 is now even better). I need to do more scientific tests but no time to deal with both cameras :) I will see how the AF works this weekend hopefully, but the 1Dx is already pretty incredible. Of course having more AF points at F8 will come in handy.

Only real difference in noise "quality" when pulling 1Dx shadows is a slight tendency to band. I noticed this in a 5D4 image too (horizontal banding), ISO1600, but cannot find it in any other images. I will post some examples over the weekend.

I believe it's usually a better comparison to upsample the smaller image rather than downsampling the larger - but still, it's quite an impressive result for the 5D4 to be that close!

jonneymendoza wrote in post #18144414 (external link)
This is one of themajor benefits of a mirrorless body. None of this AF issues.

I prey to god the next 5d goes mirrorless.

The tech will be there for a mirrorless body to have same performance as a DSLR. it is already very very close.

Not sure. Looking directly through the lens has its advantages; though I will grant that modern EVFs are getting very good.

If Canon do eventually produce a full frame mirrorless (especially in the same sort of high-end positioning as the 5D series) I suspect they're call it something new.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Talley
Talley Whacker
Avatar
11,087 posts
Gallery: 46 photos
Likes: 2773
Joined Dec 2011
Location: Houston
     
Sep 30, 2016 11:16 as a reply to  @ sploo's post |  #3463

All they need is a digic 6+ driving the EVF to instance refresh and your done


A7rIII | A7III | 12-24 F4 | 16-35 GM | 28-75 2.8 | 100-400 GM | 12mm 2.8 Fisheye | 35mm 2.8 | 85mm 1.8 | 35A | 85A | 200mm L F2 IS | MC-11
My Gear Archive

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sploo
premature adulation
2,414 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 464
Joined Nov 2011
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
     
Sep 30, 2016 11:24 |  #3464

Talley wrote in post #18144571 (external link)
All they need is a digic 6+ driving the EVF to instance refresh and your done

The problem I find is usually the lag (necessary to integrate enough light) when it's dark.


Camera, some lenses, too little time, too little talent

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AnnieMacD
Oops, me again
Avatar
3,809 posts
Gallery: 698 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 8081
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Applecross, Scotland
     
Sep 30, 2016 11:33 |  #3465

Talley wrote in post #18144431 (external link)
You don't check your focus first on a new camera before you go out?

I didn't, no. My 70-200 II seems to be fine as are a couple of primes - 85L and 135L. No time tonight or over the weekend to MFA but not too worried now. It was the disappointment when I loaded the images that really got me! I may take it with me tomorrow but will not rely on it. Probably put a 24-70 on it and take some non-action shots.


flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

820,297 views & 2,668 likes for this thread
Canon 5D Mark IV -- Time to Discuss!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EOS Digital Cameras 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is cery333
906 guests, 315 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.