Official: Canon 1D Mk IV

radiohead wrote in post #9515550
Guess I'm using a different camera then....but then what do I know as an available light shooting often using the camera in the dark never using the centre point......

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, but if my understanding is correct are you saying that Nikon cameras are psychic? That you point the camera into a black void where there's something you want to photograph and somehow the camera knows what that something is and focusses on it?

I think he is disputing that some say the Nikon can't focus quickly & well in dim light.

I can't remember that last time I wanted something so badly, maybe a Scalextric set when I was 10?

I fell sick with excitment. The 12k8 cat image is just unbelievable.

dinny66 wrote in post #9517057
I can't remember that last time I wanted something so badly, maybe a Scalextric set when I was 10?

I fell sick with excitment. The 12k8 cat image is just unbelievable.

hehe, I know man. I feel da same. Unbelievable. I really should unsubscribe from here but I just can't ... I think I'm just gonna check local stores around here to see if any of them got it, but paying $600 worth of tax is kinna lame ^^ lol. hurry up BH!!

I know how you feel. I was going to buy a 5D2 instead of my 5D, or a 7D to go with the 5D. But my eyes keep getting drawn to this wretched $5k money pit!!

Back on the topic above. HOW can any camera, Nikon or whatever, possibly know what subject you want to track unless you tell it? I took a load of pictures in a garden yesterday, sometimes photographing the birds settling in or flitting around the bushes, sometimes photographing the bushes themselves. How can the camera possibly know whether it's the bird or the twig it's resting on that should be the subject of focus, unless I tell it by defining the centre point first? I'd really like Radiohead to explain how this works with his Nikon.

Nikon D3S vs. Canon EOS 1D Mark IV - Which one's better?
http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=vkg7pAxi4gE

Nice review of the 2 big boys + a HOT Asian model

dinny66 wrote in post #9517057
I can't remember that last time I wanted something so badly, maybe a Scalextric set when I was 10?

I fell sick with excitment. The 12k8 cat image is just unbelievable.

Calumat Photo in Boston has some. I spoke with them on Friday and they received 21 or 22 MK IVs. Today they had some available from their pre-order list. I spoke with a sales person named Mike (ex-629). Mines on the way via UPS. It may be worth a call. Good luck!

GBRandy wrote in post #9516934
The fact that you can crop that much and still have a magazine quality image at ISO 2500+ is pretty impressive.

I think you need to re-think the statement. You realize that IQ for 'Magazine Quality' is very low, right? Only marginally higher than B&W newsprint...

Im not knocking the camera. Im sure its great. I just dont want you to be using a poorly calibrated measuring stick here

peterbj7 wrote in post #9517045
I'm not quite sure what you're saying here, but if my understanding is correct are you saying that Nikon cameras are psychic? That you point the camera into a black void where there's something you want to photograph and somehow the camera knows what that something is and focusses on it?

No - what I'm saying is that my experience over the last 2 years with D3 bodies (shooting with available light and in very dark conditions) does not match the short period of time (as yet unknown) used that lays claim to 'The D3 really stinks in low light. I've used them, and they hunt around and miss focus, or just never lock. The D3's AF system really isn't all that great. It works ok in daylight, but forget about it at night. If you want to increase your keepers with a D3, use your center point. But then you could just buy a 5D2 and do the same thing and save yourself a couple grand.'

Now if you'll excuse me I have to start getting excited about the 24mm f1.4 AF-S that's being announced tomorrow....

wildcart wrote in post #9517140
Nikon D3S vs. Canon EOS 1D Mark IV - Which one's better?
http://www.youtube.com​/watch?v=vkg7pAxi4gE

Nice review of the 2 big boys + a HOT Asian model

Take a look at the 3:11 mark and the two guys shooting. That's how my wife would hold that camera

That is one hot model.....

Some say Nikon's AF system is more accurate since they also use color information which Canon doesn't, but that it's also not quite as quick. I have no personal experience of Nikon, but I'd of course want to have both quick and accurate. My Mark III is mainly fast (cobra fast in locking on to a background wall ) but my Mark IV seems better balanced.

GBRandy wrote in post #9517569
...
That is one hot model.....

Uh, which do you mean, the Canon or the Nikon?

GBRandy wrote in post #9517569
Take a look at the 3:11 mark and the two guys shooting. That's how my wife would hold that camera

That is one hot model.....

I like Snookers now.....That D3s is pretty hot too

FretNoMore wrote in post #9517576
Some say Nikon's AF system is more accurate since they also use color information which Canon doesn't, but that it's also not quite as quick. I have no personal experience of Nikon, but I'd of course want to have both quick and accurate. My Mark III is mainly fast (cobra fast in locking on to a background wall ) but my Mark IV seems better balanced.

The color aware focusing doesn't do anything as far as I can tell in terms of performance. The D3 has never been able to top the 1D3 or 1D4 in AF speed or accuracy. Every test I've seen shows the D3 playing second fiddle to the 1D.

Keep in mind, the D3 only has 15 cross type sensors. The other 36 are horizontal line sensitive only... they are, in essence, similar to the outer points on the 5D2... and we all know how well they work. They don't work very well in low light or low contrast scenes.

Even the 1D3 has 19 cross type sensors, and of course the 1D4 has 39. That means the 1D4 can track a target across it's view screen and remain locked dead-nuts on regardless of lighting conditions. The D3(s), not so much.

AdamLewis wrote in post #9517439
I think you need to re-think the statement. You realize that IQ for 'Magazine Quality' is very low, right? Only marginally higher than B&W newsprint...

Im not knocking the camera. Im sure its great. I just dont want you to be using a poorly calibrated measuring stick here

I see where your going, but marginally? I am not sure I follow. I thought magazine (high) quality was around 240DPI.