EOS-1D Mark IV

[Daniel Browning]

I'm no expert on Nikon cameras, but, if I recall correctly the research I did (correct me if I'm wrong), in order to get high burst rates (frames/sec) on Nikons, you have to select a 1.5x image. You can't get 10 fps with the full-frame image.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Here's the actual numbers:


D3 full frame: 9 FPS


D3 in 1.5X DX mode: 11 FPS


D3s full frame: 11 FPS

[George Slusher]

D3s full frame: 11 FPS

I checked the Nikon page and it says 9 fps for FX, 11 fps for DX, like the D3. I'm not sure what the difference is between the D3 &amp; D3s, other than $200. I don't need to spend the time to find out, either. I ain't buyin' no Nikon, not with $7800 invested in Canon lenses (nearly all bought used), not counting the 5 I need to sell (paid $1800).


Don't get me wrong--9 fps is very good, especially for those of us used to 5 fps (30D) or even 6.3 fps (50D) or 6.5 fps (40D). I doubt that +/- 1 fps is a "killer" factor in a sports photographer's buying decision.

[George Slusher]

OK, I looked up the Nikon cameras:


Nikon D3x - FX (1x) - 24.5MP @ 5 fps; DX (1.5x) - 10 MP @ 7 fps - costs $8,000.


Nikon D3 - FX - 12.1 MP @ 9 fps; DX, 5 MP (2784 x 1848) @ 11 fps - costs $5,000.


compared to:


Canon 1D Mk III - 1.3x - 10.1 MP 10 fps, costs $3,700


Canon 1D Mk IV - 1.3x - 16.1 MP @ 10 fps, may cost $5,000


and, for reference:


Canon 1Ds Mk III - 1x - 24.1 MP @ 5 fps, cost $6,115


I can't speak of the ergonomics, as I've not used any of those. I don't like the smaller Nikons for the same reason I don't like the Canon Rebels--too cramped. That's why I went for a (used) 30D and may replace it with a 50D early next year. (Gotta pay real estate taxes this fall!)

[freelanceshots]

<meta http-equiv="CONTENT-TYPE" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<title></title>
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="OpenOffice.org 3.1 (Win32)" />
<style type="text/css"]
&lt;!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
--&gt;
</style>
<p style="margin-bottom: 0in;"]I'm disappointed too Benjamin. I
would have expected to see a lot more exciting features for the 1D
Mark IV. The one thing thats in the consumers corner is that the less
expensive cameras (7D, 5D II) share a lot of the advancements as the top of the line pro camera minus the toughness and weather sealing. I can't afford to
buy a 4,500 camera body plus I don't know if I'd buy something that
expensive unless I was headed to Iraq, Mount Everest or something. This release by Canon still make me
feel good about my recent 5D II purchase. Whats up with the crazy
expanded ISO capability of 102,400!?!? I'd like to see what that
looks like compared to the 5DII ISO 25,600. I bet its all hype like
with the newest 60hz vs. 120hz vs. 240hz LCD TV's.

[alexniedra]

Although the noise performance is yet to be revealed, just imagine what you can do with ISO 102400 at f/1.2...That top end ISO figure still impresses me.



Even with noise, I'm sure any professional photojournalist is ready to take the picture and noise over no picture.


The numbers look impressive, although I agree with posters like Benjamin - It would have been nice to see some fresher features in this new body.


All in all, looks great to me. And just in time for Vancouver 2010. I'm sure a lot of the folks over at Getty and AP will be happy.


Would I buy one? Nope. But I'm sure a lot of press and sports photographers will. Even if I had $4500 to spend. If I had that money, I'd get a 300 f/2.8 instead.

[freelanceshots]

Good point about the 300/2.8 IS lens purchase. You have my vote. Someone may ask though what are you thinking the 1D IV needed to make it a break through camera worth a big release. I'd say I'm not Japinese and I don't get paid the big bucks to design cameras but how about a new pro body that has no moving shutter. Thats where DSLR's are headed so why not break it out now!

[Fast Glass]

I still don't understand, why do you need a shutter? In live view you don't use the shutter....[8-)]

[bob williams]

HMMM, in the last two years I have jumped from an XTI to a 50D. I fully realize that those of you shooting with a pro body or even a 5d or 5dII have a lot to question about the new 1d mk IV; with the 50D, i couldn't justify the cost of the new7D.From my standpoint, the 1DIV looks like everything I have been missing. Frame rate, weather sealing, metering system, AF system, high ISO, dual processorsand even a slightly larger sensor--not a full size, but better than what I haveat the moment.Yes, I would love to have a full size sensor but that comes at twice the price or will. Though I havn't seen any "real" reviews of this camera yet, on paper it looks like a camera I could be happy with for the next 3-5 years, and I would be more willing to pay for it than I would a 5dII or a 1dIII. Personally, I think Canon found a way to lure us crop body users into the pro market---good job Canon.

[jimr]

Yet another site; Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Sample Images &amp; Movie:
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos1dm4/





The 1D Mark IV does seem impressive. It appears that the built in microphone works while shooting video. To me it appears the video add-on features look useful in a DSLR. But it is a camera first and I hope the Mark IV is representative of that.


I am looking forward to some real world reviews.

[JJphoto]

Yet another site; Canon EOS-1D Mark IV Sample Images &amp; Movie:
http://web.canon.jp/imaging/eosd/samples/eos1dm4/

the highest iso it shows is only 3200(sample pictures), I want to see some pictures taking with iso like 12800, H1, H2 and H3


the shulter speed will turn from 1/5sec(iso100) to 1/5940sec(isoH3)!