Canon 1D MK IV officially released!

[inTempus]

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
Canon: EOS-1D Mark IV Sample Images & Movie

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

Vincent Laforet’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]

?? 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]

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
Canon: EOS-1D Mark IV Sample Images & Movie

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

Vincent Laforet’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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

why am i not surprised.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

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]

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

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]

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]

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

Reviews on the real camera.

 

[schumionbike]

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]

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]

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

 

[newrmdmike]

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.