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 News & Rumors Camera Rumors and Predictions 
Thread started 08 Jan 2009 (Thursday) 11:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon's 1D Mk IV dilemma

 
bbbig
Senior Member
Avatar
364 posts
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
     
Jan 20, 2009 04:22 |  #61

pieq314 wrote in post #7099796 (external link)
Some one suggested the possibility of noise: faster read from the sensor will increase read noise. That is, 5D Mk II's speed was held back for noise control. (Assuming Canon did not hold it back due to business considerations)

Considering Canon manages noise just fine with 1Ds3 @ 5fps, I doubt they held back its speed due to noise suppression. Considering charge/discharge of sensor is possible at 10fps (1D3), I'm sure current technologies can go faster with little limitation on that front.


Roy

5D Mark III (external link) | 24-70 2.8L | 70-200 2.8L IS | 50 1.2L (external link) (full gear list)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Jannie
Goldmember
4,936 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Jan 20, 2009 11:10 |  #62

Yes, please consider my post with a ;-)a


Ms.Jannie
"When you come to a fork in the road, take it"!
1DMKIII, 85LII, 24-70L, 100-400L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GMCPhotographics
Goldmember
Avatar
2,425 posts
Gallery: 92 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 720
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Wiltshire, UK
     
Jan 20, 2009 14:26 |  #63

I've been moaning about the 5DII's fps for a little while. The digic 4 is capable of a lot more than the 5DII allows. 21mp x 3.9fps = 81.9 mp/sec. A 50D using the same Digic processor yeilds 15x6.2=93mp/sec. Canon have said that a single Digic 4 is good for around 100mp/sec. The 5DII is very shy of this figure...probably for marketing reasons, or they want to keep their 3.9 fps options with the next round of the mega pixels war. A 1D series has 2 Digics...which when combined yield about 1.6x the capacity of a single Digic. So we have a processor that can handle 160mp/sec...which is quite a lot. We can divide this many ways...16mp @10fps or more interestingly 20mp @ 8fps...which is very close to the 5DII as a Full framer. There's a lot of talk about the next 1D series having a full frame sensor, so I wonder if it'll be a slightly over clocked Digic 4 with 21.1 mp (to match the 5DII) with 8fps (to match the old 1DII) with a high speed sRAW option to bump to 10-12 fps at less mp? There's also rumours of a 1.3x active crop option. This way, every one is a winner...so to speak.
This camera would then fill dual roles as a creative full frame delight and a sports camera. If this is the case, I can see this Cam being the most versatile pro camera ever built. If you think that the 5DII is in short supply, just wait until this new cam is delivered! No wonder Canon have delayed their announcement until May...Canon can't ship the 5DII's fast enough and this cam will kill it's sales!


Regards, Gareth Cooper GMCPhotographics
"If youre happy and honest and fulfilled in what you do, then youҒre having a successful life" (Ben Elton)
Gear List GMCPhotographics (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Croasdail
making stuff up
7,545 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 536
Joined Apr 2005
Location: North Carolina
     
Jan 20, 2009 21:33 |  #64

grego wrote in post #7101416 (external link)
It has the same "reach" when cropped down, but..... when you are actually there photographing sports/action, achieving proper AF lock on a player/subject is much easier when the frame is filled compared to when they are a small spec on the view finder. The crop is useful before you take the photo. Obviously the then the advantage could go even more to the 1.6 crop, but the 1D has so much better AF that it still wins that battle.

In post, cropping in is fine and dandy, but it won't help you get a shot locked in focus before the shutter is pushed. And that is where it is very useful. Nothing replaces being able to get the shot on the spot. And that is where the crop is useful when using a 300 2.8 (390mm FOV) or the 400 2.8 (520mm FOV).

Thanks for injecting some common sense and real world application here. All this "I'll just crop later" is not the way to shoot for the very reasons you mention.


Mark
Its by knowing and mastering all the rules that you learn which ones you can break.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bbbig
Senior Member
Avatar
364 posts
Joined Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
     
Jan 21, 2009 13:22 as a reply to  @ Croasdail's post |  #65

Sounds like there may be some advantage for 1D4 to stay 1.3x crop format. Because how it gives more 'reach' and focusing is easier w/more-filled-frame, those arguments may make more sense for being a "sports body".

So, those arguments would be only so true, if sports photographers never/rarely take wide-angle shots. And when they do, they'd just use 5D or some other FF (or XXD+10-22) to take them, and those situations would be more of an exception than norm, as more shots are taken at longer focal lengths.

How true is this?


Roy

5D Mark III (external link) | 24-70 2.8L | 70-200 2.8L IS | 50 1.2L (external link) (full gear list)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Jan 21, 2009 14:05 |  #66

bbbig wrote in post #7126089 (external link)
Sounds like there may be some advantage for 1D4 to stay 1.3x crop format. Because how it gives more 'reach' and focusing is easier w/more-filled-frame, those arguments may make more sense for being a "sports body".

So, those arguments would be only so true, if sports photographers never/rarely take wide-angle shots. And when they do, they'd just use 5D or some other FF (or XXD+10-22) to take them, and those situations would be more of an exception than norm, as more shots are taken at longer focal lengths.

How true is this?

Most of the sports shooters I see at the events I work have a 16-35 f/2.8L mounted on a second 1-series body.

Even at 1.3x, the effective FOV is 20mm which is still mighty wide...


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Canonswhitelensesrule
Goldmember
Avatar
3,648 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Surrey, B.C.
     
Jan 21, 2009 23:08 |  #67

I think the next 1D Mark IV or V or whatever it will be, should stay as a 1.3x crop body. As previously mentioned, it's great for sport and action shooters to have that crop value IN the camera when you need it when shooting the action.

It should also have 10-12 fps, AND most importantly, have NO AF issues right from the start!! Get it right the FIRST time! As far as how many MPs it should have, I think somewhere in the 12-15 range, if not staying at 10 MP, would be good.

I think people tend to forget that not everyone can afford 2 or more camera bodies, and maybe someone wants a 1D series body for the high FPS rate, the 1.3x crop factor, and to use it in various types of photography, such as a nature photographer who covers animals, so the high fps would be useful in capturing a soaring bird, running animal etc, but also uses wide angle lenses to capture scenic images such as the Grand Canyon, Slot Canyons, Alaskan Glaciers etc, and even used with macro lenses.

And even if they do decide to purchase a second camera body, it would be so convenient to be able to have the same body so they wouldn't have to think twice about "Which body am I using?", and just keep shooting.

Now if Canon decided to make an EF 12-28mm f2.8L lens designed for 1.3x crop bodies, (a 15.6 - 36.4 mm FF equivalent) that might be something that 1D series body users might take a look at).

Just my 2 cents.


Photographers do it in 1/1,000th of a second...but the memory lasts forever! ;)
"It's only cheating if you get caught!" - Al Bundy
People who THINK they know it all really annoy those of us who DO!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pieq314
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,101 posts
Joined Apr 2006
     
Jan 22, 2009 09:08 |  #68

Originally Posted by grego
IMAGE NOT FOUND
HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html'

It has the same "reach" when cropped down, but..... when you are actually there photographing sports/action, achieving proper AF lock on a player/subject is much easier when the frame is filled compared to when they are a small spec on the view finder. The crop is useful before you take the photo. Obviously the then the advantage could go even more to the 1.6 crop, but the 1D has so much better AF that it still wins that battle.

In post, cropping in is fine and dandy, but it won't help you get a shot locked in focus before the shutter is pushed. And that is where it is very useful. Nothing replaces being able to get the shot on the spot. And that is where the crop is useful when using a 300 2.8 (390mm FOV) or the 400 2.8 (520mm FOV).


Croasdail wrote in post #7121805 (external link)
Thanks for injecting some common sense and real world application here. All this "I'll just crop later" is not the way to shoot for the very reasons you mention.

You do have a point about pointing the AF point more accurately with a permanent 1.3x crop with a "1.3x crop view finder".

Does any one know how Nikon's D3 handles it? Does it magnifies the view to "full view" when the camera is set in crop mode? This would be a nice feature, of course. But if I have to settle for the second best by choosing between a full frame (without view finder magnification in crop mode) and 1.3x crop sensor, I would still choose full frame.


Canon 1D Mk III/5D2, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX, Canon 85/1.8, Canon 100/2.8 IS macro, Canon 135/2, Sigma 150-500 OS, Canon 500 f/4 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pieq314
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,101 posts
Joined Apr 2006
     
Jan 22, 2009 09:13 |  #69

Canonswhitelensesrule wrote in post #7160092 (external link)
I think people tend to forget that not everyone can afford 2 or more camera bodies,

That is one of the reasons for 1D Mk IV to be a full frame sensor. Full frame will collect 70% more photons than a 1.3x crop sensor, thus better ISO noise, and Canon cannot lose the ISO noise battle with Nikon.


Canon 1D Mk III/5D2, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX, Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS, Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, Sigma 17-35mm f/2.8-4 EX, Canon 85/1.8, Canon 100/2.8 IS macro, Canon 135/2, Sigma 150-500 OS, Canon 500 f/4 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GMCPhotographics
Goldmember
Avatar
2,425 posts
Gallery: 92 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 720
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Wiltshire, UK
     
Jan 26, 2009 03:59 |  #70

Nikon have been very bold with their D3, bringing a full frame pro body to the market for sports / action / PJ ect.. Canon has wanted to unify the 1D series for several generations but hasn't had the balls to do it. Nikon has led the way and pointed to the future. Canon will most likely follw suit with a full frame pro camera (1 series), retaining the 10 fps. If we do the digic 4 maths, we get 15mp. The 1D has always matched the xxD range for mp, so no big surprise here. But this time, we are likley to see a 1.3x active crop mode as an optional CF.
If Canon drops the fps to about 7.5-8, then they could pack in a 21mp full frame sensor (aka 5D and current 1dsIII) and push the active crop to 10fps at 15mp.
From a marketing persepective it makes a lot of sence except for the current 5dII buyers might be really peeved. Given the current canon price rises and the latest DSLR prices over the last 6 months, the 1D series is likely to break the £3500 UKP barrier and sell like hot cakes.


Regards, Gareth Cooper GMCPhotographics
"If youre happy and honest and fulfilled in what you do, then youҒre having a successful life" (Ben Elton)
Gear List GMCPhotographics (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gregpphoto
Goldmember
1,123 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2008
Location: NJ
     
Jan 26, 2009 11:05 |  #71

7.5-8 fps is blindingly fast. Yes, the bird and sports folks "need" that 11 fps I suppose (even though I think I've seen beautiful works from the above fields long before motor drives were invented). In any event, I just want a camera designed for a photographer, not for a bird photographer, not a fashion photographer, not for a videographer but A PHOTOGRAPHER. Give me high quality of the following: AF, noise handling, resolution, build, etc. Do I need video? Not on your life. Do I need mountain mode and guy on bike mode? Not likely, if I just dropped $2500-$8000. Can't somebody make a rugged "digital f4" or something? Something that knows the basics, forget the fancy stuff just concentrate on blocking and tackling (thanks, Vince). Personally speaking, I would appreciate a few well designed features than an array of horrible ones.

Piss off Canon, lol.


gregpphoto.com (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
skygod44
"in stockings and suspenders"
Avatar
6,441 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 83
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Southern Kyushu, Japan. Which means nowhere near Tokyo!
     
Jan 26, 2009 22:03 |  #72

gregpphoto wrote in post #7190533 (external link)
7.5-8 fps is blindingly fast. Yes, the bird and sports folks "need" that 11 fps I suppose (even though I think I've seen beautiful works from the above fields long before motor drives were invented). In any event, I just want a camera designed for a photographer, not for a bird photographer, not a fashion photographer, not for a videographer but A PHOTOGRAPHER. Give me high quality of the following: AF, noise handling, resolution, build, etc. Do I need video? Not on your life. Do I need mountain mode and guy on bike mode? Not likely, if I just dropped $2500-$8000. Can't somebody make a rugged "digital f4" or something? Something that knows the basics, forget the fancy stuff just concentrate on blocking and tackling (thanks, Vince). Personally speaking, I would appreciate a few well designed features than an array of horrible ones.

Piss off Canon, lol.

Well said Greg.

What confuses and annoys me at the moment is how/why any manufacturer would consider that jamming every gimmick they can think of under the sun into a camera body will continue to woo photographers.

Maybe P&S people "need" more gimmicks such as face recognition? Although I always thought that humans were quite good at that, but hey! Gimmicks definitely seem to sell P&S cameras, so that's fine by me.

But the dSLR herd....? I really hope we're a bit more discerning.

Aren't we?

So why can't Canon and Nickers-on make a camera (ONE CAMERA) at each price bracket that does exactly what 95%+ of each genre of photographer will need, 95% of the time, to take beautiful, stylish, individualizable (is there such a word?) pictures?

And don't say, "it's just about the profits", or I'm likely to throw this PC through the window!
;)


"Whatever you do, enjoy yourself...otherwise, what's the point."
6D/7D and ALL Canon/Sigma gear SOLD!!!! Now: Olympus PEN EP-5 & OM-D EM-5 Mk2 and 8 lenses!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gregpphoto
Goldmember
1,123 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jun 2008
Location: NJ
     
Jan 27, 2009 02:44 |  #73

skygod44 wrote in post #7194976 (external link)
So why can't Canon and Nickers-on make a camera (ONE CAMERA) at each price bracket that does exactly what 95%+ of each genre of photographer will need, 95% of the time, to take beautiful, stylish, individualizable (is there such a word?) pictures?

I've long wondered why as well, and I've come up with: Because then you wouldn't need more than one camera, unless you want to shoot with multiple bodies of course.


gregpphoto.com (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
skygod44
"in stockings and suspenders"
Avatar
6,441 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 83
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Southern Kyushu, Japan. Which means nowhere near Tokyo!
     
Jan 27, 2009 04:27 |  #74

gregpphoto wrote in post #7196115 (external link)
I've long wondered why as well, and I've come up with: Because then you wouldn't need more than one camera, unless you want to shoot with multiple bodies of course.

At least you didn't say it was just about profit.

Well....yes, I am looking forward to the time I get a 1DMk(IV/V/whatever they call it) - which should be around 12-18 months after it's launch - so the suggestions people are coming out with for this thread are 100% of interest to me, but I do wish Canon would pull their sushi-rolls outta their collective backsides and toss out their gimmicks, reduce the bodies (by putting 95%+ of what we need into each, at each price bracket) and then developing something else, such as less noise, better AA filters, less "tweaking" via software, and more via better hardware, etc.....

Ho hum.:rolleyes:


"Whatever you do, enjoy yourself...otherwise, what's the point."
6D/7D and ALL Canon/Sigma gear SOLD!!!! Now: Olympus PEN EP-5 & OM-D EM-5 Mk2 and 8 lenses!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nicksan
Man I Like to Fart
Avatar
24,729 posts
Likes: 48
Joined Oct 2006
Location: NYC
     
Jan 27, 2009 15:18 |  #75

OK, being that you are talking about the next gen 1D body, what "gimmicks" are you exactly talking about as far as what's featured on the 1DMKIII and 1DsMKIII? Or are you generally complaining about what you THINK they will put on the new camera, like video mode? OK, so that's 1 "gimmick"...

I don't get all this whining...

Nice touch about the sushi rolls comment too..

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

skygod44 wrote in post #7196384 (external link)
At least you didn't say it was just about profit.

Well....yes, I am looking forward to the time I get a 1DMk(IV/V/whatever they call it) - which should be around 12-18 months after it's launch - so the suggestions people are coming out with for this thread are 100% of interest to me, but I do wish Canon would pull their sushi-rolls outta their collective backsides and toss out their gimmicks, reduce the bodies (by putting 95%+ of what we need into each, at each price bracket) and then developing something else, such as less noise, better AA filters, less "tweaking" via software, and more via better hardware, etc.....

Ho hum.:rolleyes:




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

12,729 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon's 1D Mk IV dilemma
FORUMS News & Rumors Camera Rumors and Predictions 
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 judybob
598 guests, 403 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.