# Canon 1D MK IV officially released!



## FrankLamont (Oct 20, 2009)

Amidst the speculation, it's arisen!

Surprisingly, DPReview hasn't got to it yet. 

But here is the news.


----------



## musicaleCA (Oct 20, 2009)

...Cool. I think the 7D still wins in the video department, but only because of sensor size (APS-C is what video gurus tend to consider "full frame"; the 35mm format, the equivalent of Vistavision, is just a wee big).

Too bad DPReview hasn't got a preview/review yet. Maybe they're all too busy harping on the 7D still?


----------



## Garbz (Oct 20, 2009)

Good god did Canon suddenly realise that AF is important?


----------



## FrankLamont (Oct 20, 2009)

DPReview's got to it, now... per usual, they were assembling a large preview and details on it.

It looks good. 

I might consider getting one if ISO handling is good... coupled with a 5D MK II, it'd be good.


----------



## musicaleCA (Oct 20, 2009)

Garbz said:


> Good god did Canon suddenly realise that AF is important?



Apparently. I told you all they were learning stuff from the 7D! :lmao:


----------



## inTempus (Oct 20, 2009)

I don't see any mention of its metering system... is it still color blind?  The 7D touted this improvement but for some reason I don't see any mention of it on the Canon website.  Hopefully I've overlooked it.

It has dual Digic IV's (no V's) and is only shooting 10fps with an APS-H sensor (the D3s does 9fps with a full frame sensor).  It sounds like they improved the AF system but if it's still color blind too I won't be impressed.  It looks like we still don't have built in WiFi.  We still have one CF card slot and 1 SD card slot (I would like to have two of the same).

It has the ability to bump ISO to 102400 on H3.  I'm curious to see how it compares to the D3s in terms of performance.

So we got a new AF system and 16mp.  Anything else?

So far I'm not all that impressed.  Let's wait to see what the reviews say.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 20, 2009)

Looks like they missed the boat on the RAW buffer depth of 28 frames at full speed. That's only 2.8 seconds worth of shooting at full firing rate. Its direct competition shoots five seconds worth of RAW files at top speed. If the Mark IV is like the Mark III, the buffer will drop to half,or worse yet only one-third of its "stated" capacity at elevated ISO settings.

Here was one problem with the Mark III, "The EOS-1D Mark III does not support UDMA2, which limits its data transfer speed to about 11MB/sec. when writing to CF cards." http://www.usa.canon.com/dlc/contro...nce. Let's hope they did so with the Mark IV.


----------



## blash (Oct 20, 2009)

inTempus said:


> I don't see any mention of its metering system... is it still color blind?  The 7D touted this improvement but for some reason I don't see any mention of it on the Canon website.  Hopefully I've overlooked it.
> 
> It has dual Digic IV's (no V's) and is only shooting 10fps with an APS-H sensor (the D3s does 9fps with a full frame sensor).  It sounds like they improved the AF system but if it's still color blind too I won't be impressed.  It looks like we still don't have built in WiFi.  We still have one CF card slot and 1 SD card slot (I would like to have two of the same).
> 
> ...



Same feelings here: while Nikon puts just 12 MP on a large full-frame sensor to get lower noise at higher ISO's, Canon is putting 16 MP on a smaller APS-H cropped sensor and trying to get the same ISO's. We'll see when the reviews come out, but it's likely not going to be up to par.

It seems like the Big 2 have carved out these "niches" for themselves: if you shoot a lot of video, go Canon. If you shoot a lot of photos, go Nikon. The D3s is likely to have better ISO performance and does have (still) better AF. We'll see about color.

All in all, looks like a decent product but not one that's really trying to compete with the D3s - Canon's just competing with itself on the video side.


----------



## inTempus (Oct 20, 2009)

Here are some high ISO images from the 1D4.

Canon EOS 1D Mark IV Preview - Digital Cameras - CNET Asia

Scroll to the bottom of the page.

Personally, I'm not impressed with these.  the subject matter is bad for the test shots in my opinion.  I'm looking forward to more test images.

I'm not excited about this release.  I really-really wanted the 1D4 to be something more... but I'm not passing judgment just yet.  But if in a few weeks I don't see some glowing reviews and after Jan I don't see some really impressive shots from actual users... you may be looking at a D3s owner.


----------



## Antithesis (Oct 20, 2009)

Whoa, 102,400 ISO looks totally useless. Seems like they tried to match the specs of the D3s with questionable results and even missed a few very important things. I was thinking the 1D4 would be totally mind-blowing, but it seems like Canon is barely able to catch up with Nikon in terms of features.


----------



## inTempus (Oct 20, 2009)

I can't find anything that tells us if the 1D4 has the new color metering system of the 7D.  Heck, they don't even bother to mention if it has the same LCD display in the view finder as the 7D.  All of this data is suspiciously absent from the Canon website.

You're right, the high ISO shots look pretty bad.  It could be argued that these are pre-production samples, but still... if it's that bad it has a long way to go between now and the 1st of the year before they start to ship.  The D3s is already showing some badass images taken in the 12800 range and it's pre-production too as they aren't on the streets yet.

It looks like the exact same body, everything is identical to my 1D3.  They don't even have a dedicated video button... you have to go into live view then activate video from there.  Lame.

This looks like a half baked release to me... I hope I'm wrong but I see absolutely nothing exciting about this new body.


----------



## icassell (Oct 20, 2009)

Well, at $5K for the Mk IV, I'm glad I bought my 7D yesterday 


Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Digital SLR


----------



## Big Mike (Oct 20, 2009)

> It looks like the exact same body, everything is identical to my 1D3.


As with every other recent Canon DSLR release...it doesn't look like it's made for those who own the previous generation model.  (Although I'm sure Canon loves those suckers who buy every new model).  It's more of an upgrade option for those who have older models or are moving up from a lesser line.


----------



## inTempus (Oct 20, 2009)

They're saying on the Canon forums that the Mk4 doesn't have color metering.  It also lacks the LCD display in the view finder that they gave the 7D.

What a joke.

So, they gave us 16MP on a APS-H sensor that has marginal high ISO performance (based on test shots posted to CNET Asia) and which lacks any real advancements in metering or even AF.  Oh, yeah, the AF is color blind too.  But on the bright side, they claim it corrects the faults of the Mk3.  But then they claimed the Mk3 was superior to the Mk2n... and it wasn't.

They should have called this the Mk3n.  This is hardly a major release.

...talk about being majorly disappointed in Canon at this point.







Nikon holds the lead once again.


----------



## gsgary (Oct 20, 2009)

No thankyou not at that price £4499 in the UK it won't do much more than my MK2's will do, video is a waste of time will never use it


----------



## Antithesis (Oct 20, 2009)

inTempus said:


> They should have called this the Mk3n.  This is hardly a major release.



True that. Would've left them room for a much better Mk4. But then again, all the Canon shooters probably feel just like the Nikon shooters did when every comparable model was significantly better. In a few years, Canon will release some crazy new camera and steal back all the Nikon converts. But for now... my next cam will be a Nikon.

And lol at Canon jumping the shark.


----------



## gsgary (Oct 20, 2009)

inTempus said:


> They're saying on the Canon forums that the Mk4 doesn't have color metering. It also lacks the LCD display in the view finder that they gave the 7D.
> 
> What a joke.
> 
> ...


 

If colour metering was a big thing they would have put it in the 1Dmk4, it is probably just a gimmick for the lower models, personaly i couldn't give a **** what these so called experts think of it i would rather try it myself and come to my own conclusion


----------



## rom4n301 (Oct 20, 2009)

just checked it out.. ****s baggin.. 10fps... video... and only 5k wtf.. why so cheap... savin up for that.. as of now..


----------



## gsgary (Oct 20, 2009)

I can't believe it doesn't have a pop up flash  my MK2's don't have one, you would have thought they would have fitted one


----------



## schumionbike (Oct 20, 2009)

I wonder how this new camera perform in low light situation, anyone got any links?


----------



## gsgary (Oct 20, 2009)

schumionbike said:


> I wonder how this new camera perform in low light situation, anyone got any links?


 
Miles better than a D3


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Oct 20, 2009)

inTempus said:


> Here are some high ISO images from the 1D4.
> 
> Canon EOS 1D Mark IV Preview - Digital Cameras - CNET Asia
> 
> ...



LOL At 102,400 you can't even SEE the subjects anymore, it's just noise!

Yeah, it basically matches the D3/D700 now, and is still a little behind the D3s because it's a partial sensor. 

And now the AF works more like the Nikon AF does, but not quite. I dunno, this really IS disappointing. It would have been great if they stuck with 10MP and better high ISO. Should have been a 1DIIIn.

Well now we all know what the 1DsIII is going to be. same thing, except 4-5fps and close to 30MP at $8000. Hot damn!


----------



## MrLogic (Oct 20, 2009)

Sw1tchFX said:


> Yeah, it basically matches the D3/D700 now, and is still a little behind the D3s because it's a partial sensor.



I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion, but if it does match the "old" D3 in terms of high ISO / low noise capabilities... that would be damn good considering the high pixel density of the 1D.


----------



## inTempus (Oct 20, 2009)

I've gotten the "damn it, this sucks" ranting out of my system.  The guys over on the Canon forums are doing a bang up job of defending it.    Check this post out:



> The Mk1V already trumps the D3s in virtually every way. From ISO range, FPS, resolution, video, liveview, you name it. I personally prefer 1.3x over FF as it gives extra reach, but still shallow DOF close to FF (unlike 1.6x). Same with the AF (where the MkIII has beaten the D3 in every head to head test and in my own). The new Servo II will most definitely be even better. Don't buy into the marketing terminology.
> 
> The fact that on paper the Mk1V is better than any DSLR out there, yet we still consider it a letdown seems to be par for the course on forums.
> 
> As for color metering, it will be included (the 7D uses it, and the new flagship will as well), however, who really cares? The metering of the MkIII was already as good as the Nikon cameras that use color metering.



I'm just going to sit back, wait until next month and see what reviewers and owners have to say about it.  Maybe I'm just being a killjoy for no good reason.  I guess I was expecting something revolutionary vs. another relatively mundane refresh.


----------



## gsgary (Oct 20, 2009)

Sw1tchFX said:


> inTempus said:
> 
> 
> > Here are some high ISO images from the 1D4.
> ...


 

Do you really believe those shots were taken by a pro, if you believe that you will believe anything :lmao:


----------



## MrLogic (Oct 20, 2009)

inTempus said:


> I've gotten the "damn it, this sucks" ranting out of my system.  The guys over on the Canon forums are doing a bang up job of defending it.    Check this post out:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



_
"From ISO range, FPS..."_  this guy is really clutching at straws. But yeah, I think it's a little early to defend or bash the 1D. It will be a while until the first decent reviews are in.


----------



## Dao (Oct 20, 2009)

Although most of you do not care about the video.  But I found this.  

Video made with 1D MK IV at ISO 6400
Nocturne - Vincent Laforet's Photos- powered by SmugMug


And some samples from Canon Japan site
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos1dm4/


----------



## schumionbike (Oct 20, 2009)

gsgary said:


> schumionbike said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder how this new camera perform in low light situation, anyone got any links?
> ...


 

Still haven't answer the question.


----------



## musicaleCA (Oct 20, 2009)

Dao said:


> Video made with 1D MK IV at ISO 6400
> Nocturne - Vincent Laforet's Photos- powered by SmugMug



Aw, best part was the girl with the handcuffs. Damn she was cute.


----------



## gsgary (Oct 20, 2009)

schumionbike said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > schumionbike said:
> ...


 
I thought someone would bite, do you think Canon would bring out a new camera if it did not better the D3, i think there could be a lot of ex canon owners that changed to Nikon D3 that wish they had stayed :lmao:


----------



## schumionbike (Oct 20, 2009)

gsgary said:


> schumionbike said:
> 
> 
> > gsgary said:
> ...


 
that's doesn't look like it's the case so far :  we'll find out soon enough.


----------



## DScience (Oct 20, 2009)

inTempus said:


> They're saying on the Canon forums that the Mk4 doesn't have color metering.  It also lacks the LCD display in the view finder that they gave the 7D.
> 
> What a joke.
> 
> ...




Intempus....if your that upset with Canon, I would be happy to send you my Nikon gear in exchange for ALL your Canon gear. )


----------



## soylentgreen (Oct 20, 2009)

I am not too sure if I would compare a 1D with a D3. Both cameras are slanted towards different types of photography. I've used both the 1Ds/1D Mark III for wildlife/ action photography and never had an issue with the AF. Even in extremely low-contrast shots it was able to pick up and track with no problems. I held out on getting the 1D Mark III because i wanted a few more MP for more resolution. I am kinda spoiled with the 5D Mark II. The new 16MP on the Mark IV will hopefully flip the bill. Video is ho-hum since i rarely use it. As for ISO, when am I ever going to use it over ISO 3200? This high ISO battle is bogus IMO. Anything that high, ISO 102,400, is pure crap that is not worth printing (You guys still print your photos right?). Maybe anything over ISO 25,000 is for a rag newspaper at 96 dpi. You want to shoot in low-light? Get fast glass. My 5D Mark II with a 50 f/1.4 can get 1/250 at ISO 800 in a candle-lit bar. And there is no denying the resolution. I hate using flash photography, and the lack of one only forces me to do without. 
 I see these incremental steps in development as a sorta game manufacturers play on the consumer. They are never going to give us everything in one model. What are they going to sell us next than? It's enough of an upgrade for me to step up to the 1D line since it is the AF I am after more than anything. The build quality and weather proofing is second to none. And teh resolution is there since I had no issues with it under the Digic III processer.


----------



## epp_b (Oct 20, 2009)

Looks like Nikon and Canon are about to pay the price for pissing away R&D on useless features like ... oh, I dunno, "video" ... 



> Well...i'm at a football match, in the press room and as expected the talk amongst the togs is the mkIV. There's 20 floating around in the UK and it sounds like I'll get a chance to try one before general release in Dec. They're doing the rounds at all the major agencies and we're in line to get one for a bit.
> 
> I'll let you all know how it is...however...
> 
> It probably wont be at a football match. FIFA are likely to release a technical document within the next few weeks re-iterating that cameras which have video enabled (ie. the mkIV and the D3s) are prohibited for all major FIFA tournaments and qualifiers. It is expected that the FA or Football Data Co will also re-release technical documents re-iterating its prohibition of video enabled cameras or the transmission of "quick succession consecutive stills which can be broadcast as video".


Sausage: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=8859159#post8859159


----------



## soylentgreen (Oct 20, 2009)

epp_b said:


> Looks like Nikon and Canon are about to pay the price for pissing away R&D on useless features like ... oh, I dunno, "video" ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I am pretty sure that the manufacturers can cripple some models for those events. Just a firmware downgrade as it were.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 20, 2009)

Canon has some sample files and movie clips from the 1D Mark IV here   Canon: EOS-1D Mark IV Sample Images & Movie

Below are a few short snippets from the Rob Galbraith preview of the newly-announced ESO 1D Mark IV, with a few comments from me following each quoted segment.  Rob Galbraith DPI: Canon announces 16.06 million image pixel EOS-1D Mark IV
"...the circuitry that reads each pixel's signal before pumping it through eight channels to the analog-to-digital converter."
***This is a nice feature--read out noise can be minimized by using multiple,separate channels. Nikon's D3 uses six read out channels due to its larger pixel pitch of 8.45µm; with the 1D Mark IV having a smaller, 1.3x sensor and 5.7µm [ µm micron square] pixel pitch, the added two read out channels makes perfect sense as a logical way to reduce noise in the signal coming off the chip, before the information reaches the analog-to-digital converter. A welcome (and probably necessary!) hardware design feature considering the jump from the MK 3's 10 MP to 16 MP, with smaller pixel size.

"...Mark IV offers one full resolution plus two reduced resolution RAW settings, MRAW and SRAW." 
***Nice! Medium and Small RAW files will give better post-production white balance correction and wider dynamic range than in-camera JPEGs, and will use less CF and drive space,and will shorten download and FTP file transfer times for those working on tight deadlines. I have been VERY impressed with reduced-size RAWs from the 5D Mark II. For newsprint, which I have shot for, 6 MP is ample,really.

"Like the EOS-1D Mark III, the EOS-1D Mark IV's sensor is the self-cleaning variety. The newer camera, however, incorporates an anti-dust fluorine coating on the outer surface of the sensor package." ***Self-explanatory--good, and good.

"... numerous aspects of the 45-point AF system in the EOS-1D Mark III have been reworked for the EOS-1D Mark IV. Canon has made changes to both the hardware components responsible for AF as well as the algorithms that govern the AF system's behaviour. There are feature changes too, such as the ability to manually select from all 45 points individually (the EOS-1D Mark III limits manual selection to a maximum of 19 points)."  and also "...can optionally be configured so that the active AF point automatically switches when the camera pivots from horizontal to vertical, or vice versa"
***The ability to have the AF point rotate when the camera is turned was one thing MusicAle expressed a desire to have in the 7D; well, for just under three times the cost of the 7D, users will get that feature in the Mark IV.
***The Mark III had the fastest one-shot, initial focus acquisition Rob Galbraith and his staff had ever tested, but there was an ongoing 18-month saga of AF problems in sequential shooting with many bodies. The Mark IV will be equipped with a new, different AF system, with a chance for new features and new hardware and software to bring the AF up to a truly state of the art performance in the field. Where the 1D Mark III was not even UltraDMA2-compliant,thus limiting the camera to an 11MB/ second write speed, the Mark IV is UDMA6-compliant, making it compatible with new cards that write in the 600x or 90 MB/second speed range. Not sure about the write speed of the second SD/SDHC card slot, but the presence of an SD card slot will allow the camera to use a Wi-FI enabled SD card, thus allowing direct camera-to-network or camera-to-web uploading feature,allowing location shooters and photojournalists to upload without the need of a laptop computer or Canon's add-on wireless unit. SD cards are also inexpensive,small, and available at Mom and Pop stores around the world. I stopped into a remote mountain store called "The Outpost"...they had fishing tackle, beer, firewood, snow chains, and SD memory cards right by the fishing tackle and battery section...50 miles from the nearest real town, and 15 miles from the end of the paved road. The area I find oddest in the stated RAW buffer depth of only 28 images. That is roughly 2.8 seconds at full firing rate,and I wonder if like the Mark III, if the buffer will lose 1/2 to 1/3 capacity at elevated ISO settings such as 3200, or if the buffer will *truly* be 28 RAW files. Nikon's D3s has a factory buffer size of 45 RAW files, or five full seconds' worth of shooting at maximum frame rate of 9 fps. Considering that a long North American football rushing play can stretch out over 10 to 15 seconds, and the useful shooting zone on most track and field events lasts roughly 10-15 seconds from the last turn to the finish line, the more seconds' worth of full-quality firing, the better for a sports/action camera.

The Mark IV also has a new ISO range, with ISO 100 being the base ISO, with native ISO's up to 12,800. Settings above 12,800 are not native, and are roughly ISO-equivalents  (not fully compliant with ISO standards), and there are three Hi-modes, 1,2,and 3, that take the camera up to an Exposure Index of 102,400. I have read Canon's information all afternoon: the Mark IV does not have color-aware light metering or color aware focusing information, or the combined aware metering and color-aware AF system that Nikon has in its newer bodies. And the cross-sensors in the Mk IV? SOME f/4 lenses and SOME f/4 effective f/4 prime telephoto lens + Teleconverter combos will be able to use the 39 cross-type sensors; the 17-40 f/4 L and 24-105 f/4 L lenses, although not actually f/2.8, **will be able to** use/access the 39 cross-type AF points, as will the 70-200 2.8 L-IS + TC 1.4x, and the Big-Glass 200mm f/2 + TC2x,the 300mm/2.8 and the 400mm f/2.8 with the 1.4x converters. This is a BIG step up over the Mark III. Some props to Canon for clever engineering there.

What's a bit odd is that the 70-200 2.8 L NON-IS model + 1.4x converter combination will *not* have access to the 39 cross-type sensors,according to Rob Galbraith's site. Neither will their 500mm f/4 L lens.

Still, Canon's got a bunch of new multi-spot, patterned AF focusing schemes, which is something Nikon has had since 2004 in the D2 series, and is in my opinion, a big step up for action shooters. The lack of the new-style viewfinder screen found in the 7D is a necessity for those who want to be able to manually-focus fast lenses by hand and eye, especially off-center, and who wish to use auxilliary viewfinder screens that give better manual focusing ascertainment with fast glass; the 7D's new ultra-bright transmissive viewfinder screen is causing a lot of focusing problems for sports shooters and fast-glass users who report being unable to accurately ascertain focus visually on the new, super-brightened, ultra-clear viewfinder screen; the older-technology viewfinder screens found in pro Nikons and pro Canon bodies is a little dimmer than the 7D's screen, but the older-technology has proven itself for multiple generations,and buyers of $5,000 cameras want to stick with proven technology most of the time.


----------



## schumionbike (Oct 20, 2009)

Interesting write up Derrel, I'm definitely excited to see how this camera work out.  Yeah, the ISO war is getting pretty rediculous with  102,400 ISO but I think you do get cleaner images at say 6400 ISO.  Beside, ISO war is more fun to watch then megapixel war.


----------



## AverageJoe (Oct 20, 2009)

I couldn't figure out which noisy ISO images you guys were referring to then I notice this on the Asian CNET Site:

Editors' note:
The images taken with the pre-production unit of the EOS 1D Mark IV have been removed at Canon's request, as we will be getting the actual review unit. Watch out for the sample shots to come.

Looks like they were so bad even Canon didn't want them shown!


----------



## schumionbike (Oct 20, 2009)

AverageJoe said:


> I couldn't figure out which noisy ISO images you guys were referring to then I notice this on the Asian CNET Site:
> 
> Editors' note:
> The images taken with the pre-production unit of the EOS 1D Mark IV have been removed at Canon's request, as we will be getting the actual review unit. Watch out for the sample shots to come.
> ...


 

In all fairness, I don't even know what the heck they were taken pictures of and why they chose that subject of all things take test shots.  It'll be a while before we can get some decents review.


----------



## soylentgreen (Oct 20, 2009)

The other gripe always making the rounds is the MP's increasing and the noise inherent there-in. Last I checked, the sensor sizes have all remained the same since inception; APS-C, APS-H, FF, whatever. With all the advancements from 4MP to 18MP for the APS-C, the IQ has gotten significantly better even as the pixel count increased.  I think too many photographers are wishing for ISO 100 quality at ISO 12800. That ain't gonna happen. 
I put enough faith in the engineers to actually know what they are doing. In the tight, competetive market that is digital photography, they are more than aware of the consequences. All brands suffer to some degree as their products do not meet expectations.
In the end, the camera is just a tool. As long at it can perform to your standards and accomplish the task, what else do you need?


----------



## musicaleCA (Oct 20, 2009)

soylentgreen said:


> The other gripe always making the rounds is the MP's increasing and the noise inherent there-in. Last I checked, the sensor sizes have all remained the same since inception; APS-C, APS-H, FF, whatever. With all the advancements from 4MP to 18MP for the APS-C, the IQ has gotten significantly better even as the pixel count increased.  I think too many photographers are wishing for ISO 100 quality at ISO 12800. That ain't gonna happen.
> I put enough faith in the engineers to actually know what they are doing. In the tight, competetive market that is digital photography, they are more than aware of the consequences. All brands suffer to some degree as their products do not meet expectations.
> In the end, the camera is just a tool. As long at it can perform to your standards and accomplish the task, what else do you need?



A good sammich and some soup. Wait, I can get that at the café down the street. Nevermind, I'm set.


----------



## Antithesis (Oct 21, 2009)

inTempus said:


> I've gotten the "damn it, this sucks" ranting out of my system.  The guys over on the Canon forums are doing a bang up job of defending it.    Check this post out:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That guys defense of the camera is kind of weak. Even if the camera just surpasses the D3, it's still in the territory of a 2 year old camera. I'm sure the mk4 will be a fine camera, just like the mk3 before it but Canon still seems to be making weird marketing decisions. More resolution, video and "picture styles" in a PJ/Sports cam? I understand the defense for it, but it still sounds like marketing lingo to me.


----------



## MrLogic (Oct 21, 2009)

Derrel said:


> Canon has some sample files and movie clips from the 1D Mark IV here   Canon: EOS-1D Mark IV Sample Images & Movie



The Nikon D3s sample images for comparison:

Nikon | Imaging Products | Nikon D3S


The Canon sample images don't go further than ISO 3200. I don't know if that's a good marketing strategy... when the competition has no issue with posting ISO 12800 shots on their official website. Yeah, it's "only" a 2 stop difference, but still... max. native ISO is 12800 on both cameras and it's one of the key features / main selling points. 




The Canon 1D at ISO 3200:

http://aux1.jp.canon.com/eosd/samples/eos1dm4/downloads/005.jpg


Nikon 3Ds at ISO 6400:

http://chsvimg.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d3s/img/pic_001b.jpg


----------



## FrankLamont (Oct 21, 2009)

Canon's requested on almost all sites now for images taken by pre-production models to be taken down... so we'll possibly be seeing the 'real thing' any time soon.


----------



## MrLogic (Oct 21, 2009)

FriedChicken said:


> Canon's requested on almost all sites now for images taken by pre-production models to be taken down... so we'll possibly be seeing the 'real thing' any time soon.



???

Derrel linked to Canon's (Japanese) website. Those images are "the real thing."


----------



## inTempus (Oct 21, 2009)

Dao said:


> Although most of you do not care about the video.  But I found this.
> 
> Video made with 1D MK IV at ISO 6400
> Nocturne - Vincent Laforet's Photos- powered by SmugMug
> ...


Well, Canon has asked LaForet to remove his 1Dm4 6400 ISO video from the web.

Vincent Laforet&#8217;s Blog



> Canon has requested that we take down Nocturne.   As a professional courtesy I am going to honor their request until they can figure out things internally and our little film can be shown again in public.   As some of you may remember this happened last year and all was fine a few days later.  Im sure they will be able to figure things out on their end and hope to be able to share the short with you again soon.  The response so far has exceed that of Reverie both in terms of numbers and in terms of how fast it happened - something that I would never have expected.



I'm sorry, WTF is Canon thinking?  It shows the exceptional quality of the video of the 1Dm4, a product they've already announced and have sample images posted of on their own website.  LaForet is a one man marketing machine, that video has been posted across the internet and getting rave reviews.

Suits... they need to be placed in a bus and driven off a cliff.


----------



## Overread (Oct 21, 2009)

?? I suppose for this prerelease stuff every info source has to have a tick in its box from canon - and I bet some things slip through the net and then some clark points out that "such and such" a video/photo etc... hasn't had official ticking! 
So they ask for it to be pulled whilst they review it themselves before they let it back out agin - all well and fine for something that hasn't got attention yet, but if it has then its far more damaging to pull it (and thus give the hint that something is wrong/not desireable) than to leave it showing. I mean once the camera is released they can't hide anything up.


----------



## MrLogic (Oct 21, 2009)

inTempus said:


> Dao said:
> 
> 
> > Although most of you do not care about the video.  But I found this.
> ...



Yes, but the high ISO images posted on CNET Asia(?) didn't exactly get rave reviews. So I guess they decided to have _every_ photo / video taken with a "pre-production" 1D Mk IV removed from the Internet, including LaForet's ISO 6400 video.

A stupid decision, but I'm sure it will be back up soon enough, as LaForet predicts.


----------



## Montana (Oct 21, 2009)

Its not a huge upgrade over the mkIII in my eyes.  I was holding out upgrading the 40D until the mkIV.  Now I think a used mkIII will be a great savings on a steller camera.  I see many in fantastic condition with about 10,000 clicks on FM for around $2,500.  half the price of the mkIV.  Its a no brainer for me.  I don't need rediculously high ISO's.  I have the 5DII for low light events anyways.  Bring on the mkV!


----------



## Derrel (Oct 21, 2009)

I spent a good amount of time yesterday over at dPreview,and on another forum, trying to get a feel for how the 1D Mark IV was being received, and to read and think about some of the points of view being expressed by Canon users. Overall, the Mark IV's reception has been kind of like the reception a Boston Red Sox fan gets in Yankee Stadium...not a kind,warm, fuzzy in sight. A couple of rabid fan-boy defenses of the Mark IV, proclaiming it the "king" of d-slrs, but overall, a lot of disappointment.

It seems like a lot of Mark II and Mark IIn shooters, working photographers most of them, those who had avoided the Mark III (arg!) due to the autofocus issues, were upset that Canon had gone the higher megapixel route on 1.3x, instead of following Nikon's D3 lead of 2007, with a 12.2 Megapixel 9/11 fps camera that offered full-frame in the camera, with a moderate MP count, and truly superb high ISO. See, the 1D Mark III and the Nikon D3 came out within six months of one another back in 2007, and six months later, Nikon introduced the professional-D3-lite D700 at half the price, but still the same pro AF system, full frame body, great high ISO, and a 'relatively' fast frame rate. SO, the D3 and 1D MArk III are of the same generation; Nikon last week iterated the D3 to the D3s with basically 720p video and the ultra-high ISO-approximations up to 102,400, but with the huge pixels and full-frame sensor, plus 1.2x in-camera sensor crop at 8 megapixels and 1.5x crop in-camera at 11 frames per second and 5 megapixel capture, plus the 8x10 aspect ratio at just under 12MP size for those who want to shoot to 8x10 aspect ratio. This for many, renders the D3s a 3- or 4-format camera.

There seem to be two 'main' areas of disappointment. First is the lack of full frame sensor in a "fast" body with :"professional" features, like pro AF and weather sealing, at an affordable price. Canon has no "fast", affordable full-frame camera body, like Nikon's D700. No offense to the 5D Mark II, but its AF system and body, are kind of like the old EOS 3--decidedly middle-class performance in AF, mirror blackout, shutter lag time, etc.

The second major area seems to be among those who realized that MOST of the good features were left alone in the Mark IV--same fast shutter response same short mirror black out, same fast firing rate, same size body, but the very high MP count on 1.3x means that at least 'some' high ISO quality was sacrificed. These people were hoping Canon might have made, well, let's call it a D3s response--lower MP count and significant emphasis on superb high ISO count. To the core constituencies sports and PJ shooters, I think the real,unstated desire was for killer high-ISO, not more megapixels. The competition between Canon and Nikon is a game of leapfrog--Nikon's original,professionally capable D1 took a couple of years for Canon to even respond to,and they responded first with the 3MP D30 (not the 30D, but the D30) before making the 4.2MP CCD-sensored original 1D,which trumped the D1h in many ways. In 2002, Canon introduced the 1Ds, the 11 MP full-frame pro high-MP body. The 1D Mark II had 8.2MP; the 1D Mark II-n had a bigger screen and still 8.2 MP. The 1D Mark III had 10 MP and 10fps, but had the focusing issue that kept MANY Canon sports guys shooting the rock-solid,super-reliably II and II-n bodies. Well, it's now been about four years for the Mark II and II-n owners who are working at newspapers and shooting weddings and doing a lot of professional work all around the world. In 2007, the D3 siphoned off many of the disillusioned,and severely cost Canon a share of the pro market. Last week, I found the statistic that Nikon's D3 and D3x sales make up 63% of the cameras sold at over $4,000 in price Hands-on: Nikon D3S review | News | TechRadar UK

I think the Mark IV has suffered a bit due to what happened with the new 7D in that MANY Canon users expected the 7D would be the Nikon D700 "equivalent" of a fast, professional AF equipped, robust half-height body,with a full frame sensor, but it was instead an ultra-high MP count 1.6x sensor. With Nikon having announced the D3s mid-term iteration last week at FF, 1.2x,and 1.5x plus 8x10 proportion, and with Nikon leading the flagship class with 24.5MP to Canon's 21 MP in its 1Ds III high-MP model, and Sony now pressing forward with a sub-$2,000 FF 850 this fall, I think a lot of the Canon faithful are feeling what one user described as "Nikon's D2h experience".

For those unaware of it, the D2h is the 4.2 MP camera Nikon announced in 2004, with Canon almost immediately trumping it with the 8.2 MP 1D Mark II with a 1.3x sensor that had better high ISO performance, which is *really* what sports shooters want. Nikon's D2h and the iteration D2Hs models were big failures for Nikon--excessive infrared response leading to purple-looking black uniforms (Leica M8 anyone?), the infamous dead meter syndrome, and only 4.2 MP when the Canon 1D Mk-II had 8.2 on a larger 1.3x sensor. Fast forward to 2007,2008,2009, and Nikon's D3 series has cost Canon such a huge segment of market share that, according to one web site source, Nikon D3 and D3x bodies now make up 63% of sales in the $4k and over category. Does the newly announced Mark IV miss the mark among the users of the earlier cameras in the series? Do those users truly want a full frame sensor and uber-ISO with huge pixels, and are they simply not interested in either video capture or a higher MP count?

Only time will tell, but frankly, I was surprised at the lukewarm response to the Mark IV among the many,many posts I read yesterday. The Cnet Asia 102,400 ISO samples were absolutely horrific, and Canon has insisted that all pre-production camera samples be pulled ,as well as asking for the removal of Vincent Laforette's 6,400 ISO shot short film Nocturne. I think Canon might have misread the true core market's desires a bit, but all is not lost. Remember, the 5D's original Canon samples looked absolutely craptastic, but that camera turned out to be a true benchmark that it took Nikon about two years to equal in IQ, with the original D3 in 2007! It seems that some professional Mark III shooters feel that the Mark IV only 'equals' or "almost equals" the Nikon D3s,and they were expecting a fourth generation model that would clearly,easily,and totally overcome Nikon's ultra-high ISO performance with moderate MP count. Royal flush every poker game? A home run every single time at bat? Uh, no, not likely.

Time will tell I suppose if the Mark IV turns into Nikon's D2h, or if it gains traction. Cameras are not in circulation yet, so I'm waiting to hear how the IV acquits itself in the real world before jumping on the bandwagon to diss it. But there sure seem to be plenty of Canon shooters damning the camera already,and honestly, I was shocked. Sorry for the long post, but I just think it's surprising to see how quickly so many Canon folks turn on the company when the products they expect (7D, Mark IV) arrive and are not what was expected. Canon pulling the pre-production samples worldwide was a huge mistake,and might add gasoline to an already hot fire.


----------



## inTempus (Oct 21, 2009)

About the only thing Canon has over the D3s right now is 39 cross type sensors vs. 15 of the D3s.  I'm sure that makes a huge difference in tracking, plus their new AISERO II.  But who knows, it's pure speculation as to how well the 1D4's AF system will work.

Nikon still has the advantage of color metering and AF tracking.  Perhaps the 1D4 can out perform it, the 1D3 did a good job against the D3 despite its known issues.  

But in terms of features, if I had it to do over again today I would not hesitate to buy a D3s over a 1D4.  Here are a few of the features I like about the D3s:

1)  Nikon knows high ISO, Canon still struggles with it.
2)  The D3s is full frame, Canon can keep the 1.3x format.  It's dated.
3)  The D3s can shoot 9fps on a full frame and 11fps in DX mode.  This trumps the 1D4 IMHO
4)  The D3s has color metering and AF subject tracking.  I put this low on the list because the 1D4 may be able to keep up even though it's color blind.  But honestly, Nikon's system seems it would be more capable of tracking a moving subject if it can tell things like skin tone and say shirt color.  Time will tell.

I can honestly see why someone would switch from Canon to Nikon at this point.  I'm considering it.  Honestly, I'll wait and see how things pan out.  But I am far from impressed with the 1D4 specs.  I think Canon is just barely keeping pace with Nikon.  They certainly aren't innovating.


----------



## Dismine (Oct 21, 2009)

> Well, Canon has asked LaForet to remove his 1Dm4 6400 ISO video from the web.



why am i not surprised.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Oct 21, 2009)

I think its' laugh-out-loud hilarious that the Nikon D700 has equal high ISO performance on the 1D4, is only 2fps slower (8 is still pretty darn quick), only 4mp less (virtually un-noticeable in a 13x19 inch print) has more AF points (although fewer x-type), much smaller, equal weather sealing, and is just over 2 grand. 

The D700 is still the BEST VALUE in upper segment SLR photography with the 5DII and 7D tied for second. The D3x and 1DsIII are way too expensive.


----------



## MrLogic (Oct 22, 2009)

^ The 5D Mk II is the better deal for portrait and landscape photographers, IMO. And what about the Sony Alpha 850?



Sw1tchFX said:


> I think its' laugh-out-loud hilarious that the Nikon D700 has equal high ISO performance on the 1D4



Equal ISO performance? At this point we don't know (IMO). The ISO 3200 image on Canon's website makes me think that it could be worse, but I'm not sure. 



> much smaller


The D700 might be much smaller than the 1D or D3, but I don't see how that's an advantage for people who use 400mm f/2.8 primes.




> is only 2fps slower (8 is still pretty darn quick)


8fps is with the grip. It's about 5 without. The D700 + grip combo makes it larger than the D3 and 1D, actually.


----------



## FrankLamont (Oct 22, 2009)

Meh, the Sony A850 is cheap but not really much. 

But yes, two D700's at the price of one 1D MK IV... 

I agree with Tim, though... Nikon has been tempting for some time now. Canon is just not getting it.


----------



## FrankLamont (Oct 22, 2009)

> Derrel linked to Canon's (Japanese) website. Those images are "the real thing."


Reviews on the real camera.


----------



## schumionbike (Oct 22, 2009)

Sw1tchFX said:


> I think its' laugh-out-loud hilarious that the Nikon D700 has equal high ISO performance on the 1D4, is only 2fps slower (8 is still pretty darn quick), only 4mp less (virtually un-noticeable in a 13x19 inch print) has more AF points (although fewer x-type), much smaller, equal weather sealing, and is just over 2 grand.
> 
> The D700 is still the BEST VALUE in upper segment SLR photography with the 5DII and 7D tied for second. The D3x and 1DsIII are way too expensive.


 
I actually saw a pro photographer shot on 2 D700 at a college football game, then there was a dude with 2 D3.   I've seen guys out there with D300 too.  I would say that if you're making money off the camera, a couple of grand might not that significant if you're using it everyday and earning a living.  You only upgrade once every 3-4 years anyway so that's like 500 bucks a year.


----------



## conoramoia (Oct 22, 2009)

Sorry if this has been mentioned, but why buy the mark 4 if the mark 3s is 21 megapixel and at the same 10fps?
I mean it'll still produce the same results if you were to use the same lens on both!

Regards,

Conor


----------



## Dao (Oct 22, 2009)

Do you mean EOS 1Ds Mark III?  I believe that can only shoot 5fps.


----------



## newrmdmike (Oct 22, 2009)

for all those talking about "switching from canon to nikon being viable" or whatever, just look a few years back when nikon didn't have full frame and the few years prior to the d3 . . . its just back and forth, i think both companies know what they are doing and feed off of peoples spec. hunger.  its just good business.  and the edge over each other usually only effects people just getting into it.  most pros have too much invested in glass to change.


----------



## conoramoia (Oct 22, 2009)

Your right but I still think that 5fps would do the job.


Conor


----------



## inTempus (Oct 22, 2009)

conoramoia said:


> Sorry if this has been mentioned, but why buy the mark 4 if the mark 3s is 21 megapixel and at the same 10fps?
> I mean it'll still produce the same results if you were to use the same lens on both!
> 
> Regards,
> ...


I think you have the products confused.

1D3 = 10fps with a 10MP sensor.
1Ds3 = 5fps with a 21MP sensor.

Two different products intended for two different markets.

The 1D4 has 10fps and is a 1.3x crop sensor body and replaces the 1D3.

The 1Ds4 has yet to be announced but will be a full frame sensor body.


----------



## gsgary (Oct 22, 2009)

One good feature for sports is that different AF points can be set for virtical or horizontal orientation, so photographers can automatically switch between landscape and potrait shots without touching the buttons


----------



## Derrel (Oct 22, 2009)

Newermdmike wrote, "most pros have too much invested in glass to change."

But, occasionally, when a real "game-changer" system comes along, pros will change in a heartbeat, especially when new technology means the gear itself will make life easier. This happens every couple of decades.

Graflex,Linhof, Rolleiflex, Leica, Hasselblad, Nikon, Mamiya, Pentax, and Canon have ALL had periods where their products were at the top of the heap and were in favor with professionals and serious shooters of all stripes. The dominance of Leica, Nikon, Hasselblad,and Canon each have been marked by periods of entire decade-long, or two-decade long stints at the top of the heap.

2007 and the Nikon trio of D300, D3, and D700, all with 51-area AF, multiple cross-sensors, and AF that actually works, and with color-aware light metering and color-aware focusing systems, and the Nikon CLS flash system and the concept of putting the "good" technologies into even the entry-level bodies has brought Nikon to its highest point in years.

There are good times to switch. In 1987, Canon had the EOS system,and the cameras were NICE! Strange and new-fangled. Nikon had the N20/20,its first AF body and it was small, cheap-feeling, and lame. By the early 1990's, Nikon had lost a leadership position it had held since 1959.

During the period of 2002 to 2006, a lot of senior level and mid-level Nikon executives were given gold watches early and the new guys and the remaining executives and engineers were told to get their sh!+ together, or else. 2007 was for Canon was very similar to how 1987 was for Nikon.


----------



## FrankLamont (Oct 23, 2009)

After all, investment in glass hardly changes -- second hand sells for almost as much as original.


----------



## musicaleCA (Oct 23, 2009)

gsgary said:


> One good feature for sports is that different AF points can be set for virtical or horizontal orientation, so photographers can automatically switch between landscape and potrait shots without touching the buttons



Not really. Canon developed that with fashion and portrait photographers in mind, not sports and photojournalist photographers. It doesn't quite work how you might expect it to, if the 7D is any indication (scroll down to the AF screens at the bottom).


----------



## usayit (Oct 23, 2009)

> Newermdmike wrote, most pros have too much invested in glass to change.



Professionals are businessmen as well... they have to weight in the cost versus how competitive they want to be in the market.  My observations are the opposite... Amateurs are less likely to switch because the investment cost of a system change is significant compared to the income it brings in.... which is NONE.  When Nikon started to make headway into high ISO performance while Canon troubleshooted their AF problems, I literally watched Canon photographers switch in a heart beat.  There were some awesome deals for Canon shooters looking for used equipment... the local shop I saw this at was making a killing.

I would also surmise the photographers working for a large media corporation don't actually buy their own equipment for work.  The cost at that point is even less of a concern.


----------



## Dao (Oct 23, 2009)

usayit said:


> I would also surmise the photographers working for a large media corporation don't actually buy their own equipment for work.  The cost at that point is even less of a concern.


I remembered when the company I work for moved to down town St. Louis. After the grand opening, the local newspaper St. Louis Post Dispatch sent someone here for an interview.  At that time (almost 9 years ago), I know nothing about camera stuff but saw the lady carried some camera equipments with her.  I asked about how much the camera cost and was told the whole setup with her cost 30 thousands.  I was like ..  wow ...   and she added that ...  those are company owned equipment.


----------



## gsgary (Oct 23, 2009)

musicaleCA said:


> gsgary said:
> 
> 
> > One good feature for sports is that different AF points can be set for virtical or horizontal orientation, so photographers can automatically switch between landscape and potrait shots without touching the buttons
> ...


 
The 1DMK4 is solely aimed at sports photographers, i have just read an article in the top pro weekly mag in the UK


----------



## MrLogic (Nov 8, 2009)

*Odds & Ends | Canon Rumors

**1D Mark IV Ship Date*
Ive heard December 9, 2009 is when the first batch of 1D Mark IVs will be in the wild. No word on what country(ies) that would be.
*
[...]

Initial 1D Mark IV Orders*
Orders for the 1D Mark IV have been beyond expectations for Canon. They do expect to meet the demand of initial orders.


----------



## MrLogic (Nov 25, 2009)

1D4 field report (very favorable): 

Canon 1DMKIV at a wedding - Jeff Ascough's Blog

Images are clickable but (alas) not full size.


----------

