Some personal thoughts on the upcoming EOS 1D Mark IV

[Jon Ruyle]

I think you put your finger on it, Colin. Until now, it seems that the 1D cameras have been limited by data rate. You can only get so many megapixles off the chip each second. If you're limited to 10mp, many sports photographers will want those 10mp concentrated. (Though, why not 1.6fovcf?)

I would think, IF you satisfy the qualifications of equal pixel density and don't have the limitations of more pixels limiting the frame rate due to processing requirements, if I were a professional photographer, I'd rather have the full frame and do cropping after the fact

I think there are very few people would disagree with that. Until now, though, it has not been possible to meet that requirement with a high frame rate.


On the 1.3 fovcf, some people say "it's the best size. Bigger than 1.6 but not so big you get tons of vingetting problems" Some people say "it's the worst size. Not ff, yet you can't use ef-s lenses"


Personally, I think it is the middle size. []

[Dallasphotog]

I'll just add that the Canon Rumors page is especially good at rumors. I think they had the 5DMKII as imminent for 2 years. Note, that they even make note of the quality of the sources with CR1, CR2, CR3 ratings.


I had a really long discussion with Canon Professional Services three weeks ago andIwastold that the MKIVdoes not have an imminent launch date.

[peety3]

What's the advantage of a 1.3 crop over a full frame? Is it a cost of manufacturing thing? Is it a matter of reach, in the sense that most sports photographers, if using a full frame body with the telephotos they could weild, would be cropping down smaller anyway, so that the extra pixels would have taxed the processing too much, and be wasted anyway?

Classically, manufacturing limitations have been the factor. In the early days, it took several "passes" to make a full-frame sensor. More recently, they've gotten good enough to make a full-frame sensor in a single pass, but I've heard a lot fail in QC. APS-H and APS-C are easier to manufacture thanks to fewer QC failures.


I suspect the current rumors (1D4 will be FF, "low" MP, high frame rate; 1Ds4 will be FF, "high" MP, low frame rate) reflect manufacturing realities, and makes sense since there won't be a need for two different bodies.


I have a 1D Mark III. I've shot with a 5D, 40D, 50D, and 400D. Nothing compares to the 1-series body, and I've had plans for a second 1D3 developing recently. I suspect I'll grab a 1D4 if they come out by September, otherwise I'll pick up another 1D3 somewhere.

[Benjamin]

By the way, I think I need to add this to the 1D IV:

• No Bug/recalls/free-service-due-to-defect after introduction

By now Canon should understand that quality is also important. IMO I think the birth of 5D II is not a mature one, since it has so many problems right out of the factory and need firmware updates one after another... The same thing with the original 5D's mirror and 1D/1Ds III's focusing system/mirror. Do it right this time, Canon.