Canon EOS5DMkIV

[Warbler]

I've been waiting for details on this for some time. I need to get better high ISO performance than the MkIII version for one particular job I do twice a year. This might help.

http://www.digitalrev.com/article/official-canon-5d-mark-iv-specs-leaked

[basketballfreak6]

latest spec here:
http://www.canonrumors.com/full-specifications-images-of-eos-5d-mark-iv/

i am super excited about the new dual pixel function (if true), namely ability to shift point of focus in post (like Lytro), also f/8 and -3EV (-4EV in LV) AF points...

combined that with the new sensor and (expected) shadow performance this is day 1 preorder for me, some real game changers here

[Fettator]

oooo gimme gimme....new toy :angel7:

[ameerat42]

Hey, GB. I can only afford this. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEjLoHdbVeE):D:D

[Butts]

latest spec here:
http://www.canonrumors.com/full-specifications-images-of-eos-5d-mark-iv/

i am super excited about the new dual pixel function (if true), namely ability to shift point of focus in post (like Lytro), also f/8 and -3EV (-4EV in LV) AF points...

combined that with the new sensor and (expected) shadow performance this is day 1 preorder for me, some real game changers here
Agree, Dual pixel function alone could be worth the upgrade. Still unsure exa ctly how it works, and there is speculation it could be introduced via Firmware to 1DxMkii.
Lots to like about the mkiv, can't wait for some solid reviews and a test after its released, which is VERY VERY soon!

[Fettator]

lol... i had to beg borrow and steal to afford my smiley :cool:

[Warbler]

And, here it is: https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-eos-5d-mark-iv-first-impressions-review

[nardes]

Gulp! Received an e-mail from Canon today, asking me to pre-order the 5D Mk IV at a price of $5,699.:eek:

I think I’ll pass on this one…:rolleyes:

Cheers

Dennis

[ameerat42]

Gulp! Received an e-mail from Canon today, asking me to pre-order the 5D Mk IV at a price of $5,699.:eek:

I think I’ll pass on this one…:rolleyes:

Cheers

Dennis

--And to think that only armed robbery has been outlawed:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Warbler]

It'll be the same price as the 5D Mk III was first launched at, so I wouldn't worry about Canon's RRP. I don't know anyone who actually pays RRP. Exchange rate variations won't help though.

[basketballfreak6]

best price right now is 4998 i think at digi direct

got my preorder in already...as much as it makes me a little sick in the stomach i have a wedding to shoot in Oct and could really use that new body...planning to sell my 5D3 after that to help cover the cost of the new 5D4

really excited as hell at all the new features as a stills photographer

[Warbler]

best price right now is 4998 i think at digi direct

got my preorder in already...as much as it makes me a little sick in the stomach i have a wedding to shoot in Oct and could really use that new body...planning to sell my 5D3 after that to help cover the cost of the new 5D4

really excited as hell at all the new features as a stills photographer

Did they give you a delivery date with your pre-order? I think it might be too late for the job I have in mind. My 5D3 has nearly 200,000 clicks on it, so it might fall over before too long.

[basketballfreak6]

Did they give you a delivery date with your pre-order? I think it might be too late for the job I have in mind. My 5D3 has nearly 200,000 clicks on it, so it might fall over before too long.

no exact delivery date...but i SHOULD be getting first batch

i think that's early Sep

gives me a solid a month and a bit to test out all the new features and make sure it plays nice with my fast primes (predominately sigma arts)

200k clicks on your 5D3 is impressive!

[fjoe45]

How will it go with older lenses?

[Warbler]

How will it go with older lenses?

As long as they are EF lenses, then no problem.

[basketballfreak6]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYhBjb-01KQ

breakdown of 5D4 stills features by Rudy Winston

that live view AF is seriously exciting stuff

[Warbler]

Looks pretty impressive. US price $3499, which is the same as the Mk 3 was. Unfortunately the exchange rate has taken a whack since I bought the Mk 3. If I hadn't already had to buy the 7D Mk II to replace my beat-up old 1D Mk 3, I wouldn't hesitate to buy this. Now, I'm going to have to think a bit longer about it, and maybe wait for all the early adopters to pay the premium.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm really not a fan of Canon's marketing/product development philosophy that put all that video stuff into a stills camera and inflates the purchase price by doing it.

[basketballfreak6]

Looks pretty impressive. US price $3499, which is the same as the Mk 3 was. Unfortunately the exchange rate has taken a whack since I bought the Mk 3. If I hadn't already had to buy the 7D Mk II to replace my beat-up old 1D Mk 3, I wouldn't hesitate to buy this. Now, I'm going to have to think a bit longer about it, and maybe wait for all the early adopters to pay the premium.

- - - Updated - - -

I'm really not a fan of Canon's marketing/product development philosophy that put all that video stuff into a stills camera and inflates the purchase price by doing it.

yea i am a pure stills guy so video means next to nothing for me, on that note 4k video with screen grab (at ~8mpx) does look interesting...that's literally firing 30 fps lol

on that note i do wonder whether or not video actually inflates sale price...one argument i hear is that it would cost canon very little to add the video features since it would mostly be software as hardware is already capable...and by adding video it appeals to a greater demographics hence significantly increasing unit sales which in turn actually keeps the cost down

either way the live view functions for stills looks real promising too

but yea i think wats hurting the most price wise is the fact that our exchange rate is so terrible atm :(

[sufran]

Ascough (Canon ambassador) has a review on the 5D4 up on his blog. He comments: "To get the very best out of this camera, you may need to think about upgrading lenses if, like me, you still have some 15 year old models hanging around!! With modern lenses, this thing is a joy to use. I shot with a 24-105 f4L MKII, 35mm f1.4L MKII, 8-15 f4L Fisheye, 85mm f1.8. Sarah (his wife and co-shooter) used the 35mm f2 IS, the 28mm f2.8 IS, and the 135 f2L. All worked perfectly with the camera."

[swifty]

The dual pixel RAW looks interesting. Looks like computational imaging is making in-roads into mainstream enthusiast photography.

[Colonel]

As a mk3 owner it's great to finally see the next evolution in the 5D line. I'm a little surprised with the choice of card slots though. I thought they might have gone for a faster option. Anyhow I'm sure there will be many people happy with this new body. Looking forward to seeing if they have managed a bump in DR, much like the 1DX mk2.

[Warbler]

The dual pixel RAW looks interesting. Looks like computational imaging is making in-roads into mainstream enthusiast photography.

It'd certainly come in handy when shooting with my bloody 50L. :lol:

- - - Updated - - -

I'll tell you what I did buy though. Two of these:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1274710-REG/canon_w_e1_wi_fi_adapter.html

Even though I currently use the Toshiba FlashAir cards these will allow remote control of the camera, and for USD$40 each, plus postage, they are cheap. Apparently there is a firmware update coming for the 7DMkII and possibly for the 5DMkIII that retro activates these. Looks like they'll do RAW files too if need be, but I'll mostly be using it for small JPEGs, and streaming to customers' smartphones.

- - - Updated - - -


As a mk3 owner it's great to finally see the next evolution in the 5D line. I'm a little surprised with the choice of card slots though. I thought they might have gone for a faster option. Anyhow I'm sure there will be many people happy with this new body. Looking forward to seeing if they have managed a bump in DR, much like the 1DX mk2.

Yes, I thought UHS-II might have been a good choice for the SD slot.

[JJM]

They look very interesting, where did you hear they might be doing a firmware update for the 5D MK III to activate these?



- - - Updated - - -

I'll tell you what I did buy though. Two of these:

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1274710-REG/canon_w_e1_wi_fi_adapter.html

Even though I currently use the Toshiba FlashAir cards these will allow remote control of the camera, and for USD$40 each, plus postage, they are cheap. Apparently there is a firmware update coming for the 7DMkII and possibly for the 5DMkIII that retro activates these. Looks like they'll do RAW files too if need be, but I'll mostly be using it for small JPEGs, and streaming to customers' smartphones.

[Warbler]

They look very interesting, where did you hear they might be doing a firmware update for the 5D MK III to activate these?

Canon Rumours site, so might be just wishful thinking. Still it only software, so maybe Magic Lantern might offer a solution once they reverse engineer it.

- - - Updated - - -

Can't find it there now. Might have been another of the many rumour sites. If it's not true, I might have a spare adaptor for sale....LOL.

- - - Updated - - -

I see the firmware updates for the 5DS and 5DSr, and the 7D Mk II are on-line now, but nothing for the 5D Mk III. Oh well, I'm sure I'll be able to flog off the spare adaptor I ordered.

https://www.canon.com.au/en-AU/Personal/Support-Help/Support-News/Firmware-Updates/eos-5d-eos-5dsr-firmware-update

[basketballfreak6]

I'm a little surprised with the choice of card slots though. I thought they might have gone for a faster option.

i am quite happy that they stuck to cf/sd instead of going to cfast, but disappointed to see uhs-1 instead of uhs-2 tho

what i was really hoping actually was a bigger buffer, but ~21 raw is not bad i guess

[basketballfreak6]

anyone been keeping up to date with the body?

Jared Polin posted a few raw files (in DNG format) for download, there is one shot ISO 12800 that's very underexposed with bad recording studio lighting, i had a play and pushed 2 whole stops in lightroom and result still very good, none of the banding and blotchy-ness that you see with the 5D3 sensor, colour retained very well even at such high ISO AND 2 stop push, the ISO 5000 shot which was shot daytime indoor lighting i didn't even feel the need to apply any luminous NR, the noise characteristics looks very good indeed

and there is talks now that the dual pixel raw the 2 "subframes" are recording different information and seems to be recording an extra stop of highlight (which technically is blown out) so with the proper software implementation to access that data we may be getting another stop of DR on what's already looking impressive at the new sensor's ability pushing shadows (see DP review's recent test)

this body is just looking better and better

bring on the 8th, can't wait to get the camera

[Babu]

I have used Canon 5D bodies since their inception and am still using a 5D I, 5D II, and a 5DsR.
I can't see the point in picking up a 5D IV.
It may not have 30 Mp but the 1DX II is not Canon's flagship body for nothing!
Did you check what most of the togs trackside/ poolside at the Olympics were using?

[Warbler]

I have used Canon 5D bodies since their inception and am still using a 5D I, 5D II, and a 5DsR.
I can't see the point in picking up a 5D IV.
It may not have 30 Mp but the 1DX II is not Canon's flagship body for nothing!
Did you check what most of the togs trackside/ poolside at the Olympics were using?

No doubt you're surprised every day to see people driving Toyotas and not Bentleys. If I had a 1DxII, I wouldn't be buying a 5DMkIV either, but I can get two 5DMKIVs for the price of one 1DxII.

[MissionMan]

I like the idea of dual pixel raw, but I think in its initial stages the degree of focal changes are pretty limited. I suspect this will increase in time. Agree on the buffer though. For $5k they could easily have included twice that in the cost.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[basketballfreak6]

No doubt you're surprised every day to see people driving Toyotas and not Bentleys. If I had a 1DxII, I wouldn't be buying a 5DMkIV either, but I can get two 5DMKIVs for the price of one 1DxII.

yeah...didn't really get the point of that post either, comparing camera that's 2x the cost and targeted at a different user group?

- - - Updated - - -


I like the idea of dual pixel raw, but I think in its initial stages the degree of focal changes are pretty limited. I suspect this will increase in time. Agree on the buffer though. For $5k they could easily have included twice that in the cost.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

uhs-ii sd slot, af linked spot metering, articulated screen, bigger buffer and slightly faster fps and it would be the perfect camera for me, but then i can see it starting to eat into 1 series' sales too so i can only dream lol

- - - Updated - - -

been mucking around in dp reviews studio shot comparison raw chart looking at high iso (focusing at 6400 and 12800) between 5d4, 5d3, a7r2 and d810


my takeaway so far...


compared to d810 and a7r2, having higher res and no aa filter the 2 bodies are perceptibly sharper compared to the 5d4, but not night and day, the differences are there tho if you look for it but again nowhere near deal breaker, the 5d4 looks sharp


compared to 5d3 the 5d4 to me is sharper the same way d810/a7r2 is to the 5d4, while the file looks bit cleaner at iso 6400 on the 5d3 at 12800 5d4 all of sudden looks noticeably better, and i think it's due to the finer noise character of the 5d4 and as well noticeably less chroma noise, compared to the smudgy-ness of the 5d3, the smudge is there too at 6400 on the 5d3 so to me the 5d4 will still have a better file after running thru proper sharpening/nr in post


i think canon's really done a great job balancing low iso DR/increased res/high iso noise with this new sensor in 5d4

[Warbler]

yeah...didn't really get the point of that post either, comparing camera that's 2x the cost and targeted at a different user group?

Yeah, more about avoiding becoming inactive than anything else I think. Be nice to see an image posted occasionally though.

- - - Updated - - -

And speaking of UHS-II, check out the price of these 150MB/Sec Lexar cards. Hopefully Canon will catch up with this technology soon.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1090744-REG/lexar_lsd64gcrbna10002_pro_1000x_uhs_2.html

[MissionMan]

Yeah, more about avoiding becoming inactive than anything else I think. Be nice to see an image posted occasionally though.

- - - Updated - - -

And speaking of UHS-II, check out the price of these 150MB/Sec Lexar cards. Hopefully Canon will catch up with this technology soon.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1090744-REG/lexar_lsd64gcrbna10002_pro_1000x_uhs_2.html

Tend to agree, you're either a 1D customer or not. I don't think they really compete. I do think the pricing on this camera is a little high. It's almost as expensive as buying both a D810 and D500.

[basketballfreak6]

Yeah, more about avoiding becoming inactive than anything else I think. Be nice to see an image posted occasionally though.

- - - Updated - - -

And speaking of UHS-II, check out the price of these 150MB/Sec Lexar cards. Hopefully Canon will catch up with this technology soon.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1090744-REG/lexar_lsd64gcrbna10002_pro_1000x_uhs_2.html

looking through early previews and comments makes me think these days there are more armchair experts and keyboard warriors than people actually taking their cameras out taking photos

and yea sd cards have really caught up in performance and are quite a bit cheaper too, wished canon haven't gimped the sd card slot

- - - Updated - - -


Tend to agree, you're either a 1D customer or not. I don't think they really compete. I do think the pricing on this camera is a little high. It's almost as expensive as buying both a D810 and D500.

price definitely on the high side, but to be fair it is the same launch price as the 5D3 and when you take into the improvements and that it's been 4 years (inflation) and how bad aussie dollar has been i guess it's expected

[MissionMan]

looking through early previews and comments makes me think these days there are more armchair experts and keyboard warriors than people actually taking their cameras out taking photos

and yea sd cards have really caught up in performance and are quite a bit cheaper too, wished canon haven't gimped the sd card slot

- - - Updated - - -



price definitely on the high side, but to be fair it is the same launch price as the 5D3 and when you take into the improvements and that it's been 4 years (inflation) and how bad aussie dollar has been i guess it's expected

Yeah, I'm doing more of a comparison to their main competitor which would be Nikon. Obviously people have already bought into Nikon or Canon and are unlikely to switch, but if you're a new buyer , it's going to be hard to justify the $1500 premium when that can buy you a nice piece of glass. I think if they priced themselves down to the $4K mark they would have left themselves in a good position.

[basketballfreak6]

Yeah, I'm doing more of a comparison to their main competitor which would be Nikon. Obviously people have already bought into Nikon or Canon and are unlikely to switch, but if you're a new buyer , it's going to be hard to justify the $1500 premium when that can buy you a nice piece of glass. I think if they priced themselves down to the $4K mark they would have left themselves in a good position.

yea i have no doubt won't take too long before price drops...again i think the biggest problem is how weak our aussie dollar is atm hahaha

[rum pig]

I would really love to have a play with one of these.

[basketballfreak6]

quick test shot at ISO 12800

ran raw file through DPP and exported as TIFF then edited in LR5

sharpning 85, luma nr 25 and colour nr 25

early impressions in terms of performance, auto focus snappy AF, locks on even in very dark light, focus seems good with my sigma 50 art out of box no adjustment required, 7 fps sounds faster than it should

think i am in love

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8482/28915529944_b45bc56c3a_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/L4aDDJ)5D mk IV ISO 12800 (https://flic.kr/p/L4aDDJ) by Tony (https://www.flickr.com/photos/basketballfreak6/), on Flickr

[basketballfreak6]

and here she is :P

https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8370/29563655855_f87be59d28_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/M3rsUp)5D Mark IV + EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II (https://flic.kr/p/M3rsUp) by Tony (https://www.flickr.com/photos/basketballfreak6/), on Flickr

[Warbler]

Now I'm jealous. Have they sped up that SD slot any from the Mk III?

[basketballfreak6]

Now I'm jealous. Have they sped up that SD slot any from the Mk III?

up to 104MB/sec i believe

[basketballfreak6]

for those that may be interested...

exposed for highlights and pushed 3 stops in post, held up extremely well

https://c4.staticflickr.com/9/8440/28977327243_14eeaed5f7_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/L9CnQp)5DIV Sensor DR Test (https://flic.kr/p/L9CnQp) by Tony (https://www.flickr.com/photos/basketballfreak6/), on Flickr

https://c8.staticflickr.com/8/7512/28977194543_91c644db2e_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/L9BGot)5DIV Sensor DR Test (https://flic.kr/p/L9BGot) by Tony (https://www.flickr.com/photos/basketballfreak6/), on Flickr

url=https://flic.kr/p/LYCELZ]https://c2.staticflickr.com/9/8425/29520576041_2eee512c41_b.jpg[/url]5DIV Sensor DR Test 2 (https://flic.kr/p/LYCELZ) by Tony (https://www.flickr.com/photos/basketballfreak6/), on Flickr

https://c3.staticflickr.com/9/8512/29567043226_3d52211b6c_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/M3JPRm)5DIV Sensor DR Test 2 (https://flic.kr/p/M3JPRm) by Tony (https://www.flickr.com/photos/basketballfreak6/), on Flickr

part 2 much more demanding ~4.5 stop push in the shadows, granted very tricky and busy foreground but file does start to fall apart a bit here, i am sure it would hold up better in less demanding foreground

[Mark L]

ran raw file through DPP and exported as TIFF then edited in LR5



Is the reason you go via DPP simply to convert to TIFF or do you do a couple of basic things there on your way to TIFF??

[basketballfreak6]

Is the reason you go via DPP simply to convert to TIFF or do you do a couple of basic things there on your way to TIFF??

purely to convert to TIFF, i made sure everything is on zero tho before making the conversion in DPP

if only adobe would get their act together

- - - Updated - - -

https://c3.staticflickr.com/9/8492/28978044474_79cb473c6d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/L9G43s)Scarlett Honeyeater (https://flic.kr/p/L9G43s) by Tony (https://www.flickr.com/photos/basketballfreak6/), on Flickr

ISO 12800, shot with sigma 150-600S at 600mm wide open handheld

[Hamster]

purely to convert to TIFF, i made sure everything is on zero tho before making the conversion in DPP

if only adobe would get their act together


Clearly I'm missing something. What is it that LR won't do that means you have to go to DPP first?

[basketballfreak6]

Clearly I'm missing something. What is it that LR won't do that means you have to go to DPP first?

adobe are asses when it comes to updating their raw support, currently no way of opening up 5DIV's raw file via adobe programs (even the dng converter not reading the raw)

been very frustrating editing 5DIV files atm

[MissionMan]

adobe are asses when it comes to updating their raw support, currently no way of opening up 5DIV's raw file via adobe programs (even the dng converter not reading the raw)

been very frustrating editing 5DIV files atm

There are a couple of things I find confusing with both Canon and Nikon when it comes to third party support. Obviously RAW files are a different issues, but the native support for RAW files seems to be better in the manufacturers products which makes me think that part of the problem is Canon and Nikon, although I'm sure Adobe has some part in it. The reason I say this is that I would never expect third parties with non-competitive products to have to reverse engineer some of the components.

The reality is Lightroom doesn't really compete with Nikon or Canon's offering, and yet the manufacturers seem hesitant to part ways with some of the IP that would make the photos out of their camera better. As another example, Profoto had to reverse engineer the TTL for Canon and Nikon, as they will for other systems like Fuji or Sony. The same with other manufacturers. Why? Anyone who buys a profoto B1 is clearly beyond the realms of a speedlight which is not strong enough to do things like overpower sunlight, and you would expect it to be an advantage for their users if they can use more professional tools.

[Hamster]

adobe are asses when it comes to updating their raw support, currently no way of opening up 5DIV's raw file via adobe programs (even the dng converter not reading the raw)

been very frustrating editing 5DIV files atm

Ah, yes, of course. I forgot there's a bit of a wait for the RAW support. Like MM says, it's a bit odd that Canon don't work with Adobe and hand over the info required on the launch of their new camera. Having said that, maybe Adobe think they can do a better job of converting RAW files and want to do it themselves. Capture one Pro is supposed (at least by the highly regarded pros I've talked to) to be a better RAW converter than LR (or the manufacturers software) and may think similarly. The downside is the wait...

[MissionMan]

Ah, yes, of course. I forgot there's a bit of a wait for the RAW support. Like MM says, it's a bit odd that Canon don't work with Adobe and hand over the info required on the launch of their new camera. Having said that, maybe Adobe think they can do a better job of converting RAW files and want to do it themselves. Capture one Pro is supposed (at least by the highly regarded pros I've talked to) to be a better RAW converter than LR (or the manufacturers software) and may think similarly. The downside is the wait...

I've started playing with Capture One and I'm pretty impressed. I think it'll be a big learning curve coming from lightroom, but overall I have found it to be good.

There are small features in the software I like, the ability to create presets for white balances off someone's skin for example. I.e. I can use a grey card in a photo to create a preset for my daughters forehead, then use her forehead as a white balance for future photos of her. Obviously it's not exact because skin tone can vary, but it's close enough to allow for fairly accurate white balances if you have photos of a person in varying conditions.

[basketballfreak6]

Ah, yes, of course. I forgot there's a bit of a wait for the RAW support. Like MM says, it's a bit odd that Canon don't work with Adobe and hand over the info required on the launch of their new camera. Having said that, maybe Adobe think they can do a better job of converting RAW files and want to do it themselves. Capture one Pro is supposed (at least by the highly regarded pros I've talked to) to be a better RAW converter than LR (or the manufacturers software) and may think similarly. The downside is the wait...

i think Canon's pretty stingy with their propriety stuff, much like their AF system for example (which is fair enough), guessing adobe has to reverse engineer or develop their own raw interpretation software themselves, still for a company this magnitude as well what many considers it the industry standard, it's pretty disgraceful for such slow support for a launch as big as the 5DIV, while on the topic of bashing adobe i also hate how they purposely stop updating adobe raw on older versions of their software as a method to force you to upgrade

- - - Updated - - -


I've started playing with Capture One and I'm pretty impressed. I think it'll be a big learning curve coming from lightroom, but overall I have found it to be good.

There are small features in the software I like, the ability to create presets for white balances off someone's skin for example. I.e. I can use a grey card in a photo to create a preset for my daughters forehead, then use her forehead as a white balance for future photos of her. Obviously it's not exact because skin tone can vary, but it's close enough to allow for fairly accurate white balances if you have photos of a person in varying conditions.

capture one is something i keep hearing about and wanting to try, but at this stage i dunno if i want to start from scratch with regards to editing...haven't even bothered to master photoshop yet...lol

i have to say i absolutely love lightroom tho, powerful (enough) yet simple to use, 98% of all my edits are done there

[MissionMan]

You can use capture one instead of Lightroom in combination with photoshop. It's more of a Lightroom competitor but has the advantage of layers.

The basics in capture one are fairly simple. It's the advanced stuff like Lightroom that takes time but they have created heaps of instructional which help


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ameerat42]

...haven't even bothered to master photoshop yet...lol...



So you're seeking to master Photoshop. A modest aim, so to speak... Most of us just "use" it (as best we can).

[basketballfreak6]

So you're seeking to master Photoshop. A modest aim, so to speak... Most of us just "use" it (as best we can).

LOL can you believe i only did my first ever composite in PS like a month ago?! after like 6 years doing this hobby? hahaha

[Hamster]

I bought and started using Capture One and pretty much had things under control after a few weeks of irregular use. All the same features as LR are there so there's a certain familiarity from the start. But you can customise shortcuts to be the same as LR for things that you regularly use such as G for grid/library view, R for resize etc. and really make it familiar/similar to LR.
The colour control is better and the ability to use layers/local adjustments is very good, as is the sharpening. If I was starting from scratch or not using photoshop much then I'd say C1 is the go. For me, I do my layer work in PS so the need to use the feature in C1 isn't there. Plus I have lot of processed images in LR and I didn't want to have the need to swap between the two for new and legacy images. It was just too open to stuff ups like forgetting to synchronise a folder, thinking it was empty and deleting it even though it contained images. C1 does seem to do a better job of the raw conversion.
Integration with other programs isn't as good as LR.
I can see me using it for the raw conversion where it's really important that this is as good as it can be, before transferring through to photoshop. e.g. a large print or a competition entry. I wish all my images were done in C1 but the years of LR use and the fact that I do serious layer work in Photoshop mean it's not as big an improvement as it needs to be for me to use it all the time.
Incidentally, converting my LR catalogue to a C1 catalogue worked fine, with no glitches.

- - - Updated - - -





capture one is something i keep hearing about and wanting to try, but at this stage i dunno if i want to start from scratch with regards to editing...haven't even bothered to master photoshop yet...lol

i have to say i absolutely love lightroom tho, powerful (enough) yet simple to use, 98% of all my edits are done there


You sound like a good candidate for a switch to Capture one. The extra editing functionality over LR would mean you could avoid going to PS for longer

[basketballfreak6]

I bought and started using Capture One and pretty much had things under control after a few weeks of irregular use. All the same features as LR are there so there's a certain familiarity from the start. But you can customise shortcuts to be the same as LR for things that you regularly use such as G for grid/library view, R for resize etc. and really make it familiar/similar to LR.
The colour control is better and the ability to use layers/local adjustments is very good, as is the sharpening. If I was starting from scratch or not using photoshop much then I'd say C1 is the go. For me, I do my layer work in PS so the need to use the feature in C1 isn't there. Plus I have lot of processed images in LR and I didn't want to have the need to swap between the two for new and legacy images. It was just too open to stuff ups like forgetting to synchronise a folder, thinking it was empty and deleting it even though it contained images. C1 does seem to do a better job of the raw conversion.
Integration with other programs isn't as good as LR.
I can see me using it for the raw conversion where it's really important that this is as good as it can be, before transferring through to photoshop. e.g. a large print or a competition entry. I wish all my images were done in C1 but the years of LR use and the fact that I do serious layer work in Photoshop mean it's not as big an improvement as it needs to be for me to use it all the time.
Incidentally, converting my LR catalogue to a C1 catalogue worked fine, with no glitches.

- - - Updated - - -




You sound like a good candidate for a switch to Capture one. The extra editing functionality over LR would mean you could avoid going to PS for longer

might have to download a trial and give it a crack sometimes

[Babu]

Have you seen promos for the W-E1 SD slot Wi-Fi adapter Canon has announced for the 7D II, 5Ds & 5DsR ? B&H are taking pre-orders at US$39.95 but haven't given a shipping date yet.

I'm glad you're happy with the 5D IV. (From the images you've posted, it seems to be working well). It's getting good reviews and, ordinarily, I would have bought one. However, I have the 5DsR for high res shots and I wanted a body which can deliver faster burst rates than 7 fps and works well at lower light levels. The 1DX II ( $8599 at CameraPro) is substantially less than double the launch price of the 5D IV ($4988 without a grip) but you are right - it is aimed at a different user group.

[Warbler]

Going through the same pain as you are BBFreak. Picked up a 5D Mk IV this morning. Not all that keen on having to convert my images to TIFF before then processing them through PS. Let me know when they update CC to include the Mk IV in their RAW converter. I'll have to go to CC from CS6. It was probably about time I did anyway. Spent all day trying to set up the Wi-Fi to auto upload to a WD My Cloud hard drive. No luck yet, but flattened two batteries doing it.

[Physioz]

for those that may be interested...

exposed for highlights and pushed 3 stops in post, held up extremely well

Very nice, Tony. Please keep going, I need to amass more evidence like this for my boss (wife) :)

- - - Updated - - -

Nice bird/photo; Tony, is that ISO 12800 without any noise reduction?

[Fettator]

Teds have them for $5000 :cool:

GB

[basketballfreak6]

Going through the same pain as you are BBFreak. Picked up a 5D Mk IV this morning. Not all that keen on having to convert my images to TIFF before then processing them through PS. Let me know when they update CC to include the Mk IV in their RAW converter. I'll have to go to CC from CS6. It was probably about time I did anyway. Spent all day trying to set up the Wi-Fi to auto upload to a WD My Cloud hard drive. No luck yet, but flattened two batteries doing it.

how are you finding the performance of the camera so far?

- - - Updated - - -


Very nice, Tony. Please keep going, I need to amass more evidence like this for my boss (wife) :)

- - - Updated - - -

Nice bird/photo; Tony, is that ISO 12800 without any noise reduction?

lol i'll try when i get more time

the bird pic has had noise reduction applied already

[Warbler]

how are you finding the performance of the camera so far?

I've hardly used it at the moment. Been concentrating on setting the comms up as I'll be using it on a job next week where the images I take will go straight to a server in real time for the clients to view as I shoot. There's a bit of pressure right there...LOL.

I have noticed though that it has the same issues with recording to two cards simultaneously as the Mk III did. It's just not fast enough in the SD slot. I have no empirical data on it though. It may be marginally quicker, but at the price, UHS-II, or two CF slots would have been the go I think. Did you notice that Canon flipped the positioning of the USB and HDMI slots on the side of the camera? The little plastic fitting only allows the cables to fit in the correct slot. It means that the fittings are not interchangeable between the two models ie the 7D Mk II fitting won't fit the 5D Mk IV model. Gawd, it's like Sony all over again. You couldn't use the same battery in different cameras when I had a Sony, nor use the same charger.

I'll be giving it a bit of a shake-down tomorrow at the MX Race Day, so I'll know for sure how it performs for the use it is likely to get from me by then.

- - - Updated - - -

I meant to ask, have you tried the dual-pixel adjustment yet in DPP Ver 4? I had a quick look at it and couldn't figure out how to get it to work. I'll need to do some more reading. In the meantime, I'm getting 60MB RAW files with it switched on. That's only 600 images to a 32GB card, according to the camera's LCD display. The modest 7fps might be a good thing....lol.

[basketballfreak6]

I've hardly used it at the moment. Been concentrating on setting the comms up as I'll be using it on a job next week where the images I take will go straight to a server in real time for the clients to view as I shoot. There's a bit of pressure right there...LOL.

I have noticed though that it has the same issues with recording to two cards simultaneously as the Mk III did. It's just not fast enough in the SD slot. I have no empirical data on it though. It may be marginally quicker, but at the price, UHS-II, or two CF slots would have been the go I think. Did you notice that Canon flipped the positioning of the USB and HDMI slots on the side of the camera? The little plastic fitting only allows the cables to fit in the correct slot. It means that the fittings are not interchangeable between the two models ie the 7D Mk II fitting won't fit the 5D Mk IV model. Gawd, it's like Sony all over again. You couldn't use the same battery in different cameras when I had a Sony, nor use the same charger.

I'll be giving it a bit of a shake-down tomorrow at the MX Race Day, so I'll know for sure how it performs for the use it is likely to get from me by then.

- - - Updated - - -

I meant to ask, have you tried the dual-pixel adjustment yet in DPP Ver 4? I had a quick look at it and couldn't figure out how to get it to work. I'll need to do some more reading. In the meantime, I'm getting 60MB RAW files with it switched on. That's only 600 images to a 32GB card, according to the camera's LCD display. The modest 7fps might be a good thing....lol.

so how did your shoot go? i haven't got around trying DP raw yet lol

[Warbler]

Yes, I gave it a test, albeit under bright natural light. These are just my observations.

The AF system seems to be an improvement on the MK III and the 7D Mk II. It is much faster to acquire focus. It still doesn't hold focus as well as I'd like, at least not on the settings I was using. I'll experiment with those a bit, but I'm focussed on the job I start on Thursday. I shot with DPR on with RAW to the CF card and large fine JPG to the SD card. Set the camera to fast burst. I also had the Highlight Priority on as I planned to use the JPEG images while I'm waiting for Adobe to get it's act together. This slowed the burst rate a bit and affected the buffer too. RAW files were up to 69mb each and JPEGs were between 7 and 10mb each. That choked the buffer.

I am impressed with the image quality and particularly with the JPEGs, given I can't see the RAW files yet. I might eventually go all JPG for some jobs.

Spend an hour screwing around with the Wi-Fi, but when I finally got it working how I wanted it, I flattened a battery downloading. You don't know if you don't try it out. I do work for some newspapers and they expect me to be able to send images from out in the stix where there is no power. Getting them straight onto my phone and sent is the way to go, so figuring out the speed and endurance of the wi-fi link is worth the effort. Don't let it time out though because it won't automatically reconnect.

The real test comes from Thursday. ISO6400, 1/400th, f2.8..... It should outperform the Mk III easily on noise. Once I've finished that job, I'll be able to give you better feedback on it.

[Warbler]

Here's something else that is a bit odd about the 5D Mk IV. Adobe hasn't yet included it in the RAW converter, but I've attached a screen grab of Bridge CS6 which shows that it will actually preview the RAW file. I'm guessing that it is not much different to all the other Canon RAW files, and this is just part of Adobe's marketing strategy that you can't open them in old version of Photoshop. They don't open, but they do preview as you can see for yourself. The JPEGs are edited and cropped.

[ameerat42]

An embedded jpeg of the CR2, maybe, rather than the raw file itself?

[basketballfreak6]

great stuff Warbler, it's such a good camera ain't it? and yea adobe are d!cks

[Warbler]

An embedded jpeg of the CR2, maybe, rather than the raw file itself?

Yes, but Bridge is set to create 100% previews on my setup. The thumb should also reflect any edits I've done which the JPEG does, so I think that might mean it can't be using the extracted thumb because it wouldn't reflect any changes I made. Photo Mechanic might have something to do with it, because it previewed the RAW files in full size when I was associating the RAW with the JPEG and renaming them. Notice that the RAW shows the date/time I renamed them rather than the date/time I took them as the JPEG does. Anyway, I just thought it was odd.

[arthurking83]

Yes, but Bridge is set to create 100% previews on my setup. The thumb should also reflect any edits I've done which the JPEG does, so I think that might mean it can't be using the extracted thumb because it wouldn't reflect any changes I made. ....

I'd reckon it's the embedded jpg too.
Nikon's software does this too with files it can't technically open.
Their older software can't open their newer raw files, but if set to view the quick file(ie in jpg mode) the older software will render the newer raw file no problems .. even at 100% view.
Raw files usually contain 3 or 4 embedded jpg files, and one of those is the full monty from pixel 1,1 all the way to the final pixel in the diagonally opposing corner.
Others are used for quick thumb generating and some of them are totally useless to the user and only used internally by the camera.

And if you make changes to the raw file, there is no guarantee that it will be reflected in the jpg files if you use a program that creates edits via external XML type data.

Because I don't use Adobe software I can't check the settings myself and can't be bothered installing it all again just for this purpose .. but the analogy in Nikon software again:
If I use VNX2(old unsupported software) and make an edit to a raw file, the edits are stored in the raw file .. CNX-D(current software) can see the edited file as it's edited.
But! .. CNX-D makes it edits via an external XML type file system .. I make the same edit in CNX-D, but of course no other software(other than the one's that Nikon have linked up!) can see that edit either.
Whereas, keeping the edit in the raw file(as VNX2 does it) .. all other software update the embedded jpg file to reflect the status of the raw file.

So if you make an edit to the raw file using DPP, does the image rendered in Bridge change to reflect the edit in DPP too?
if not, then it's not using the embedded jpg file(s) in any way.
if it does, the 99.9% certain that it's using at least one(maybe multiple) embedded jpg files.
That's really the only way to explain the situation with any certainty.
AFAIK: the current build of Photo Mechanic was released about 4 weeks prior to the MkIV's release .. to their fully fledged raw support for the MkIV files will be limited too.

And remember, just because you're previewing the raw file in full size .. doesn't mean that the file you are seeing isn't the embedded jpg!

[Warbler]

I am aware that each RAW file contains more than one embedded jpeg. The guy who wrote the Breezebrowser program wrote a very good explanation of it some years ago. Bridge may have a fall back written into it that simply searches the file for an embedded jpeg, but generally it generates its own file which it writes to the cache. Often you have to force it to refresh for it to update the appearance of this generated jpeg once you've made changes. The generated jpegs do display edits you do to the RAW file using ACR ie in its own generated jpeg, not the associated jpeg file which you may think I meant from what you said above. There is also a setting where Bridge applies an auto tone adjustment when it displays. You don't really want to have that set to on because your conversions won't look anything like what Bridge is displaying. Very confusing. I just found it odd that Bridge displayed anything other than a placeholder. Photo Mechanic displayed a full sized jpeg, but that program does display and extracted jpeg from the RAW file, always. It does this to render a preview in the quickest way possible as it is designed for photographers who work to a strict timetable like sports photographers who file images during a game, or where they have to tag images as they download them.

I'm sure the whole issue will be a non-issue in a matter of weeks when Adobe update CC.

- - - Updated - - -

I can't seem to find the exact article that Chris Breeze wrote, but google "Chris Breeze embedded jpeg files" and you'll find numerous references.

[Hamster]

Adobe have updated camera raw for the mk IV, I believe.

[Warbler]

Adobe have updated camera raw for the mk IV, I believe.

Indeed they have. Just downloaded CC.

- - - Updated - - -

Now I need to reinstall all of my filters like Noise Ninja. There'll be some noise in the sky that my edits have put there.

[arthurking83]

Also, for the Canon folks that know this:

I have an older version of DPP, and can't remember how to get it updated to the newer version :o
(remember I'm not a Canon user tho).

I downloaded one of the MkIV files from DPR, and (my old version) DPP displays only a small thumbnail sized preview of the MkIV file .. ie. in the thumbnail preview strip
So it's obviously set to display raw images only as raw files.

While this may make sense to some, it's not unreasonable to expect other options being available either.
Nikon's old ViewNX2 allows you to set the manner with which you want to display the raw file .. either as a (faster) jpg, or the full raw file(ie. slower and higher quality).
So while VNX2 can't display the raw file of say a D500 in raw mode, it can still display the image when set to jpg mode.
If VNX2 is set to display the raw file, it doesn't render the D500 images and only displays a message that the file type is unsupported.

[Warbler]

I have an older version of DPP, and can't remember how to get it updated to the newer version :o
(remember I'm not a Canon user tho).

If you have the camera, you have the software. It's on the disc you get with the camera. If you don't have the disc or a CD reader, then you go to Canon's website and download a copy, but you need a serial number from your camera to do so. I'm pretty sure it doesn't have to a serial number from that model either, but I'll stand corrected if it is. I used DPP to process the RAWs until I got CC2015. It does a good job and has some nice features like its HDR processing. It is also the program you'll need to use to avail of the PDR at the moment.

[arthurking83]

If you have the camera, you have the software. It's on the disc you get with the camera. If you don't have the disc or a CD reader, then you go to Canon's website and download a copy, but you need a serial number from your camera to do so. .....

Cant' remember where I got the serial number to get my copy of DPP going(it was a couple of years ago now, and my memory is pretty terrible with stuff like this).
But there's no option to just update, or go to a site to update or whatever :confused013

[Tannin]

Just in case it isn't clear from posts above, to install DPP (and all the other Canon software) without the CD, simply download the programs you want from Canon.

Install the first one. It will ask you for your camera serial number (this is written on the bottom of the camera). If you have multiple cameras, just use any one of them, it doesn't matter which one. Enter the number.

Now install as many other Canon programs as you want. Only the first one asks for a serial number.

To upgrade, just install the upgrade. Never any need for the serial number again unless you buy a new computer.

[Hamster]

PM me if you need a serial number @arthurking83

[boggo]

I picked up my mark iv yesterday. Was a hard choice as there have been a wide variety of opinions on the camera and if it is worth it or not. I also upgraded my 70-200 2.8 from version 1 to 2. After 20 shots today of the kids, all I can say is I am glad I upgraded. I do think the sharpness, noise, resolution etc is noticeably better than what i had before - too my eyes anyway. Have ordered some faster compact flash cards so I can record 4k... now that will be fun!

[Warbler]

Well, I've now put over 20,000 clicks on Mk IV, admittedly under not a wide variety of conditions, but I must say it is an improvement over both its predecessor and the 7D Mk II. I didn't get any colour pattern noise at high ISO that I got from the Mk III, and it is even better to focus in low light than the 7D Mk II is. I got many less throwaways than the 7D Mk II gets. Once I've finished satisfying customers by getting their images on-line, I'll post some here. Shot an event in a theatre with limited lighting - better than last time, but still not good. Shot manual, mostly at ISO 6400 to ISO8000, 1/640th to 1/800th, f2.8 to f4. Still underexposed by nearly a stop to nearly three stops, but got some nice images. Shot both RAW and JPEG, so I'll post some JPEG straight from the camera. Ended up having to buy two additional 64gb CF cards as I couldn't get more than 500 images to each 32gb CF card, usually less than 450. Average size of the RAW files was 64mb, even the pure black ones I occasionally got trying to photograph the LCD displays. Burst rate was a bit slow and buffer limited, but still better than the Mk III. The main thing is that it did the job that I bought it to do, and I'm happy with that. Twelve 14 hour days of 1 to 2 thousand images a day, gave it (and me) a real test.

[Warbler]

As promised:

http://www.ausphotography.net.au/forum/showthread.php?149482-Dancing-in-the-Dark&p=1381917#post1381917

[basketballfreak6]

sorry been away for a while, but experienced a weird issue with my 5D4 and had to send it away, gone for a whole month, basically with more shooting i noticed the outer af points consistently front focuses compared to centre point with all my L's (24-70II, 70-200II, 100L and 16-35f4L IS)

Canon ended up having to test every single AF point individually including the vertical, horizontal and cross arrays individually on all my lenses at different focal lengths to make adjustments

just got it back today did some quick tests and seems fixed now

shot from today. (well yesterday now lol), 9 image shot vertically at 16mm stitched, exposed for sky foreground pushed ~3 stops in post

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5780/29776118033_3cefba119d_b.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/Mndovp)Brisbane Skyline Pano (https://flic.kr/p/Mndovp) by Tony (https://www.flickr.com/photos/basketballfreak6/), on Flickr

[Warbler]

Hmm... Not a problem I've noticed, but I'm rarely using the outside AF points anyway. I'll have to give it a try and see if mine has the same issue.

[basketballfreak6]

Hmm... Not a problem I've noticed, but I'm rarely using the outside AF points anyway. I'll have to give it a try and see if mine has the same issue.

yea it's strange, i can even notice it on my 16-35 f4 with such big DOF, it's more prominent when shooting closer as well obviously due to smaller DOF

[HughD]

sorry been away for a while, but experienced a weird issue with my 5D4 and had to send it away, gone for a whole month, basically with more shooting i noticed the outer af points consistently front focuses compared to centre point with all my L's (24-70II, 70-200II, 100L and 16-35f4L IS)

Canon ended up having to test every single AF point individually including the vertical, horizontal and cross arrays individually on all my lenses at different focal lengths to make adjustments

just got it back today did some quick tests and seems fixed now

shot from today. (well yesterday now lol), 9 image shot vertically at 16mm stitched, exposed for sky foreground pushed ~3 stops in post

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5780/29776118033_3cefba119d_b.jpgBrisbane Skyline Pano (https://flic.kr/p/Mndovp) by Tony (https://www.flickr.com/photos/basketballfreak6/), on Flickr

- - - Updated - - -

You had to send a brand new Camera in for a month?:angel6::angel6:You must be a Saint!

[basketballfreak6]

- - - Updated - - -

You had to send a brand new Camera in for a month?:angel6::angel6:You must be a Saint!

yea...it was originally meant to be a week, then kept getting delayed...spoke to tech team leader apparently someone lost part of testing data so they had to start over...

wasn't too pleased that i paid early adopter fee and didn't get to use it lol...oh wells stuff happens i guess

[Dylan & Marianne]

I've had mine for a few shoots now and taking it to Canada to put it through its paces
I haven't tested dual pixel RAW capabilites so I can't comment
I am VERY happy with the fact that its dynamic range is now practically same as the a7r2. I can push 3 stops shadows and though a bit grainy , isn't the mushy mess canon sensors used to give me
The AF is very cool to play with - shooting in a dark auditorium for APSCON, it picked up focus points in the dark far easier than my mk3
The live view tracking is amazing! so much so that for moving subjects I think I will be shooting in live view. That is, once you turn live view on and face tracking, touch the face on the LCD and it will follow that face around the screen everywhere while you click away. Hoping to put this to use for photographing the kids in the snow and potentially any wildlife we see.

[basketballfreak6]

I've had mine for a few shoots now and taking it to Canada to put it through its paces
I haven't tested dual pixel RAW capabilites so I can't comment
I am VERY happy with the fact that its dynamic range is now practically same as the a7r2. I can push 3 stops shadows and though a bit grainy , isn't the mushy mess canon sensors used to give me
The AF is very cool to play with - shooting in a dark auditorium for APSCON, it picked up focus points in the dark far easier than my mk3
The live view tracking is amazing! so much so that for moving subjects I think I will be shooting in live view. That is, once you turn live view on and face tracking, touch the face on the LCD and it will follow that face around the screen everywhere while you click away. Hoping to put this to use for photographing the kids in the snow and potentially any wildlife we see.

agreed, the extra DR (mainly clean shadows) and the live view AF are just awesome

[Tricky]

Has anyone bought the 5D4 as a kit with the 24-105 MkII? If so, what are your thoughts?
I'm going to buy the 5D4 before Xmas but not sure whether to also swap my Mk I 24-105 for the Mk II version... to be honest, I rarely use the 24-105 for anything other than family snaps, hence why I'm wavering...

[aVex]

I'm wondering if I'm the only one experiencing this,

My camera is paired with a EF 24-70 F2.8L II, and during my video shoot while focus tracking, the focusing mechanism is loud, the microphones pick up shuddering noise from the USM motor, almost like it's hunting. In photo mode, dead quiet even in live view, and the focusing is fine.

[arthurking83]

I'm wondering if I'm the only one experiencing this,

.... and during my video shoot while focus tracking, the focusing mechanism is loud, the microphones pick up shuddering noise from the USM motor, almost like it's hunting. ....

I doubt you're the only one finding this effect.

The microphone on the camera is very sensitive, and best not used unless it's vitally important.
I recently advised this to another member about video, but the best way to capture video is always externally.
Trying to do it via a separate capture device is subsequently hard to sync(but can be done in professional grade video editing suite(like Adobe's Premiere).
Best option for the average joe is to find a decent quality but affordable shotgun mic at the least. It should have a wind sock of some type to make it usable.

If you want to use the onboard mic because that's all you have, to 'eliminate' camera noises, you'd have to shoot in manual mode and focus manually.
manual focusing can be dead quiet, but you have to careful with it that you don't shuffle your hand around the camera/lens body, or you will hear that noise too!
You hold your hand under the lens body in a deliberate and ready to focus manner(ie. try not to use just your fingers) and maintain a good grip. You won't hear the turning of the focus ring via the camera's onboard mic, but if you shuffle your hand (eg. from focus ring to zoom ring) you will hear that noise.

I remember that Canon made a bit of noise(pardon the pun) about the introduction of a new consumer level lens that was ultra quiet .. specifically for this purpose.
Can't remember which one tho(a more knowledgeable Canonite may come along and held there) .. but this is the reason why!
If you have other lenses to test, almost 99.999% certain they'll all make the same ... or worse ... or maybe slightly less worse .. noises too.

[bricat]

[QUOTE=arthurking
If you have other lenses to test, almost 99.999% certain they'll all make the same ... or worse ... or maybe slightly less worse .. noises too.[/QUOTE]

Wow is that the best fence sitter quote I have seen? :lol:

[Physioz]

I picked up my mark iv yesterday. .. I also upgraded my 70-200 2.8 from version 1 to 2. After 20 shots today of the kids, all I can say is I am glad I upgraded. I do think the sharpness, noise, resolution etc is noticeably better than what i had before

Have fun; would have been interesting to know how much of the improvement came from the upgraded lens and how much from the camera.. what the heck ENJOY!

[FoTenX]

Looks like the bomb!

[dolina]

How happy are you with your 5D Mark IV?

[Tannin]

Is that a general question Dolina? Or to someone in particular? I'd be hard pressed to fault mine. It's an extraordinarily capable and well-designed machine, with stunning output.

[mikew09]

latest spec here:
http://www.canonrumors.com/full-specifications-images-of-eos-5d-mark-iv/

i am super excited about the new dual pixel function (if true), namely ability to shift point of focus in post (like Lytro), also f/8 and -3EV (-4EV in LV) AF points...

combined that with the new sensor and (expected) shadow performance this is day 1 preorder for me, some real game changers here

I have seen two reviews on the dual pixel now, one by Tony Northrup and cant remember the other reviewer and fair to say it is a little disappointing and has limited use. It also is more taxing on the camera, file size etc. Having said that there are many other features much improved I would consider upgrading for if I had that bag of money I needed. My 5D3 is a more than capable camera and I still love it and are content with it, however, that doesnt stop me getting some new model envy :nod:

[dolina]

Is that a general question Dolina? Or to someone in particular? I'd be hard pressed to fault mine. It's an extraordinarily capable and well-designed machine, with stunning output.
Tony, the question is addressed to all owners of the 5D Mark IV. :)

[Tannin]

Cheers Dolina.

Back in 1878, Leo Tolstoy answered that question better than I can when he wrote: "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

There is very little to say about the 5D IV. It delivers wonderful picture quality without the slightest fuss. It's as small and light as you could reasonably expect a camera of this class to be; it has very nearly all the features I can think of that are useful to me, and a lot of features that I'll never use but might be useful to someone else; the Canon user interface has been refined and polished and improved and refined again over the 15 years since the pioneering D60 was released and is very nearly perfect.

The sensor is a joy: examine this example -

http://tannin.net.au/other/ap/2017/171009_073128-1_640.jpg

(Resized full-frame image from a 5D IV and 100-400 II. Not cropped or post-processed. ISO 400, f/8, 1/2500th.)


http://tannin.net.au/other/ap/2017/171009_073128-1_crop.jpg

(100% crop, still not post-processed in any way. Now it's far from a perfect picture, but considering the insane crop involved, it's pretty amazing just the same.)

Plus it is compatible with, all things considered, the best range of lenses on the market. It might strike you as a bit expensive, but when you consider how much better it is than pretty much anything else in the Canon range - in many regards superior to the 1D X II at twice the price - it is more properly regarded as a bargain.

There are tasks for which another model might be better suited, in particular the 7D II (birding), the 80D (macro), and either the 7D II or the 1D X II (action sport), and for many uses a much cheaper model might be equally useful - I'd rather have an 80D and a quality lens than a 5D IV and a cheap one - but for all-round quality and value, I reckon it can't be beat.

[dolina]

Very deep. Thank you for taking time to reply. :)


Cheers Dolina.

Back in 1878, Leo Tolstoy answered that question better than I can when he wrote: "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

There is very little to say about the 5D IV. It delivers wonderful picture quality without the slightest fuss. It's as small and light as you could reasonably expect a camera of this class to be; it has very nearly all the features I can think of that are useful to me, and a lot of features that I'll never use but might be useful to someone else; the Canon user interface has been refined and polished and improved and refined again over the 15 years since the pioneering D60 was released and is very nearly perfect.

The sensor is a joy: examine this example -

http://tannin.net.au/other/ap/2017/171009_073128-1_640.jpg

(Resized full-frame image from a 5D IV and 100-400 II. Not cropped or post-processed. ISO 400, f/8, 1/2500th.)


http://tannin.net.au/other/ap/2017/171009_073128-1_crop.jpg

(100% crop, still not post-processed in any way. Now it's far from a perfect picture, but considering the insane crop involved, it's pretty amazing just the same.)

Plus it is compatible with, all things considered, the best range of lenses on the market. It might strike you as a bit expensive, but when you consider how much better it is than pretty much anything else in the Canon range - in many regards superior to the 1D X II at twice the price - it is more properly regarded as a bargain.

There are tasks for which another model might be better suited, in particular the 7D II (birding), the 80D (macro), and either the 7D II or the 1D X II (action sport), and for many uses a much cheaper model might be equally useful - I'd rather have an 80D and a quality lens than a 5D IV and a cheap one - but for all-round quality and value, I reckon it can't be beat.

[basketballfreak6]

How happy are you with your 5D Mark IV?


I have seen two reviews on the dual pixel now, one by Tony Northrup and cant remember the other reviewer and fair to say it is a little disappointing and has limited use. It also is more taxing on the camera, file size etc. Having said that there are many other features much improved I would consider upgrading for if I had that bag of money I needed. My 5D3 is a more than capable camera and I still love it and are content with it, however, that doesnt stop me getting some new model envy :nod:

yea in the end i never bothered with dual pixel raw lol

in terms of 5D4 vs 3 (which is still a very capable body), i find the files much better to work with on the 4, obviously better shadows/DR in low ISO and even at higher ISO, surprised at how good it looks few times i had to push ISO12800 files in post, nicer noise character and sharper image due to the extra pixels makes it feel like i have a ~1 stop advantage at higher ISO (despite overall amount of noise looking about the same as 3, if that makes sense)

dual pixel AF in live view is just amazing, using it a lot more than i thought i would (if only it had a tilty screen it be perfect)

AF feels just that bit more snappy and confident compared to the 3

on paper probably not the most exciting update over the mk3 but when you actually use it's fantastic, i definitely feel it's a worthy upgrade

[Mika]

Cheers Dolina.

Back in 1878, Leo Tolstoy answered that question better than I can when he wrote: "Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way."

There is very little to say about the 5D IV. It delivers wonderful picture quality without the slightest fuss. It's as small and light as you could reasonably expect a camera of this class to be; it has very nearly all the features I can think of that are useful to me, and a lot of features that I'll never use but might be useful to someone else; the Canon user interface has been refined and polished and improved and refined again over the 15 years since the pioneering D60 was released and is very nearly perfect.

The sensor is a joy: examine this example -

http://tannin.net.au/other/ap/2017/171009_073128-1_640.jpg

(Resized full-frame image from a 5D IV and 100-400 II. Not cropped or post-processed. ISO 400, f/8, 1/2500th.)


http://tannin.net.au/other/ap/2017/171009_073128-1_crop.jpg

(100% crop, still not post-processed in any way. Now it's far from a perfect picture, but considering the insane crop involved, it's pretty amazing just the same.)

Plus it is compatible with, all things considered, the best range of lenses on the market. It might strike you as a bit expensive, but when you consider how much better it is than pretty much anything else in the Canon range - in many regards superior to the 1D X II at twice the price - it is more properly regarded as a bargain.

There are tasks for which another model might be better suited, in particular the 7D II (birding), the 80D (macro), and either the 7D II or the 1D X II (action sport), and for many uses a much cheaper model might be equally useful - I'd rather have an 80D and a quality lens than a 5D IV and a cheap one - but for all-round quality and value, I reckon it can't be beat.

Nice pics - thanks for sharing.