Canon 1D Mark IV at DVinfo.net

Don Miller · October 20th, 2009, 09:58 AM

The third vDSLR from Canon was announced today.
The news for nature shooters appears to be extremely good low light performance. Here's a link to a blog that demonstrates the new cameras capability:

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2009/...camera-action/

Gerdy Vandermeersch · December 31st, 2009, 08:17 AM

Hey Don...

Is it gonna be a big difference with the 5d Mark II you think?

Chris Hurd · December 31st, 2009, 08:37 AM

It will have a significant increase in low-light performance over the 5D Mk. II or any other D-SLR to date.

Gerdy Vandermeersch · January 4th, 2010, 03:52 AM

Hello Chris.

The Canon 1d Mark IV hasn't a fullframe sensor, is this correct? That's very strange then for me because of the big price you have to pay for this DSLR?

Ken Diewert · January 4th, 2010, 11:00 AM

I've read that it's 1.3x - which does seem a bit strange for the price of this camera.

Gerdy Vandermeersch · January 5th, 2010, 06:23 AM

Yes indeed Ken. It can't only be the ISO that makes the huge difference. Can someone explain this?

Tony Davies-Patrick · January 5th, 2010, 07:39 AM

It is a professional-grade camera and, like all the Canon EOS 1D & Nikon D series of bodies they come with a high price tag. The far higher costs of producing camera bodies built using stronger materials and with tighter tolerances for the professional market reflects in the actual selling price.

Chris Hurd · January 5th, 2010, 08:56 AM

As usual, Tony has stated this much more succinctly than I can, but it's important to understand the Canon D-SLR product family and pricing structure. The EOS 1D series has always been APS-H and it has always been priced at appx. $4K to $5K.

There's another model above it, which is the EOS 1Ds. Its next iteration will be most likely include the same HD video recording mode as the 1D has now. While the 1D has always been APS-H, the 1Ds will have a Full-Frame sensor and will most likely cost the same as it has before, probably around $7K to $8K.

The 1D and 1Ds share the same body, which is weather-sealed and tough enough to bury in sand, drive a tank over it, dig it back up and go on shooting again. It is definitely professional-level gear. The 1D with its APS-H sensor and fast frame rate is primarily intended for journalists and sports photographers who work a lot in telephoto and who really benefit from the 1.3x crop factor (which acts like a built-in teleconverter), while the 1Ds with its Full Frame sensor and slower frame rate is primarily intended for studio and portrait work... although of course it is pretty much mix and match, shoot whatever you want with either one. If you can afford them then of course you can do whatever you want with them.

I guess the point I'm trying to get across is despite how expensive you think the 1D is with an APS-H sensor, there's still one more model above it that is yet even more expensive and is indeed Full Frame, and that is the 1Ds. Hope this helps,

Ken Diewert · January 5th, 2010, 11:59 AM

Thanks Tony & Chris... You see Gerdy, that's why we come here.

Don Miller · January 5th, 2010, 03:03 PM

Also, pricing at this point in time is not designed to be "fair" to videographers. The pricing structure (and the form factor, of course) is a continuation of what still photogs expect from Canon.
Once Canon figures out what video-specific large cmos offerings look like price structures may make more sense. Not that their goal is to make everyone happy.

Kin Lau · January 5th, 2010, 04:44 PM

I don't see many videographers being interested in this camera. Working PJ's that are doing both stills and video will be much more interested. Wildlife, sports and some wedding photogs who don't even use video will use all the other features, video is just an add-on that might or might not be useful for them. They're not paying anything extra for it either.

The only reasons I can see videographers going for this are 1) low noise/high iso performance, supposedly better than the 5Dm2 2) rugged build, as both Tony & Chris alluded to, 3) twin storage media, both CF and SD - I don't know if the 1Dm4 can record video to both at once, but it can record stills to both at the same time.

Marc Myers · January 6th, 2010, 07:52 AM

I think the very reasons mentioned above make this a compelling choice for wildlife videographers. Most of the time I don't care all that much about sound (and record ambient sound on another device anyway). I almost always shoot mounted on a tripod. I've done some shooting in heavy forest. Sony's VX series could make adequate (not great) video but the still cameras were effectively blind in the same conditions. Video and stills in a tough, compact package that operates in low light and gives me a 1.3X advantage in my telephoto? Sign me on.

October 20th, 2009, 09:58 AM	#1
Don Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Chicago Posts: 706	Canon 1D Mark IV The third vDSLR from Canon was announced today. The news for nature shooters appears to be extremely good low light performance. Here's a link to a blog that demonstrates the new cameras capability: http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2009/...camera-action/

December 31st, 2009, 08:37 AM	#3
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	It will have a significant increase in low-light performance over the 5D Mk. II or any other D-SLR to date. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

January 4th, 2010, 11:00 AM	#5
Ken Diewert Trustee Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Vancouver Island, Canada Posts: 1,200	I've read that it's 1.3x - which does seem a bit strange for the price of this camera. __________________ C100, 5DMk2, FCPX

January 5th, 2010, 07:39 AM	#7
Tony Davies-Patrick Trustee Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Worldwide Posts: 1,589	It is a professional-grade camera and, like all the Canon EOS 1D & Nikon D series of bodies they come with a high price tag. The far higher costs of producing camera bodies built using stronger materials and with tighter tolerances for the professional market reflects in the actual selling price. __________________ www.WILDCARP.com www.NIKON.me.uk

January 5th, 2010, 08:56 AM	#8
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,368 Images: 513	As usual, Tony has stated this much more succinctly than I can, but it's important to understand the Canon D-SLR product family and pricing structure. The EOS 1D series has always been APS-H and it has always been priced at appx. $4K to $5K. There's another model above it, which is the EOS 1Ds. Its next iteration will be most likely include the same HD video recording mode as the 1D has now. While the 1D has always been APS-H, the 1Ds will have a Full-Frame sensor and will most likely cost the same as it has before, probably around $7K to $8K. The 1D and 1Ds share the same body, which is weather-sealed and tough enough to bury in sand, drive a tank over it, dig it back up and go on shooting again. It is definitely professional-level gear. The 1D with its APS-H sensor and fast frame rate is primarily intended for journalists and sports photographers who work a lot in telephoto and who really benefit from the 1.3x crop factor (which acts like a built-in teleconverter), while the 1Ds with its Full Frame sensor and slower frame rate is primarily intended for studio and portrait work... although of course it is pretty much mix and match, shoot whatever you want with either one. If you can afford them then of course you can do whatever you want with them. I guess the point I'm trying to get across is despite how expensive you think the 1D is with an APS-H sensor, there's still one more model above it that is yet even more expensive and is indeed Full Frame, and that is the 1Ds. Hope this helps, __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

December 31st, 2009, 08:17 AM	#2
Gerdy Vandermeersch Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Ieper, Belgium Posts: 75	Hey Don... Is it gonna be a big difference with the 5d Mark II you think?

January 4th, 2010, 03:52 AM	#4
Gerdy Vandermeersch Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Ieper, Belgium Posts: 75	Hello Chris. The Canon 1d Mark IV hasn't a fullframe sensor, is this correct? That's very strange then for me because of the big price you have to pay for this DSLR?

January 5th, 2010, 06:23 AM	#6
Gerdy Vandermeersch Regular Crew Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Ieper, Belgium Posts: 75	Yes indeed Ken. It can't only be the ISO that makes the huge difference. Can someone explain this?

January 5th, 2010, 11:59 AM	#9
Ken Diewert Trustee Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Vancouver Island, Canada Posts: 1,200	Thanks Tony & Chris... You see Gerdy, that's why we come here. __________________ C100, 5DMk2, FCPX

January 5th, 2010, 03:03 PM	#10
Don Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Chicago Posts: 706	Also, pricing at this point in time is not designed to be "fair" to videographers. The pricing structure (and the form factor, of course) is a continuation of what still photogs expect from Canon. Once Canon figures out what video-specific large cmos offerings look like price structures may make more sense. Not that their goal is to make everyone happy.

January 5th, 2010, 04:44 PM	#11
Kin Lau Major Player Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 385	I don't see many videographers being interested in this camera. Working PJ's that are doing both stills and video will be much more interested. Wildlife, sports and some wedding photogs who don't even use video will use all the other features, video is just an add-on that might or might not be useful for them. They're not paying anything extra for it either. The only reasons I can see videographers going for this are 1) low noise/high iso performance, supposedly better than the 5Dm2 2) rugged build, as both Tony & Chris alluded to, 3) twin storage media, both CF and SD - I don't know if the 1Dm4 can record video to both at once, but it can record stills to both at the same time.

January 6th, 2010, 07:52 AM	#12
Marc Myers Regular Crew Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Long Island, NY and Northeast PA Posts: 132	I think the very reasons mentioned above make this a compelling choice for wildlife videographers. Most of the time I don't care all that much about sound (and record ambient sound on another device anyway). I almost always shoot mounted on a tripod. I've done some shooting in heavy forest. Sony's VX series could make adequate (not great) video but the still cameras were effectively blind in the same conditions. Video and stills in a tough, compact package that operates in low light and gives me a 1.3X advantage in my telephoto? Sign me on.