Hmmm. Are these the specs for the Canon 1D Mark IV? They all look right expect for the megapixel count. The rumor mentions a video mode, ISO up to 26,500, and a quicker overall speed. But the rumor states that the camera will be around 16MPs. That doesn’t make sense at all. The 1Ds Mark III and 5D Mark II both shoot at 21.1MP. Why would the the in between model have something different?
This 1D Mark IV is slated to replace the 1D Mark III, which is currently the 2nd most expensive EOS camera residing between the 1Ds Mark III and the 5D Mark II. Chances are that this model is getting an update, but we highly doubt that it would come with a different sensor than what the two other newish Canon cameras have.
But anyway, here is what the rumor states the 1D Mark IV will have.
Note this refers to a particular test camera, and as Canon regularly tell people doing testing ‘not all features may make it to production’.
1.3 crop
Images ~16MP
ISO 50-26500
8MP sRAW1 format providing images that seem to best 1D3 files in detail [typo corrected]
Very clean images at ISO 3200. 6400/12800 take further processing very well
Slightly faster FPS than 1D3 in real life shooting
AF greatly improved and very good in low light (actual comment was ‘Nikon fast’ ;-)
Liveview AF – not up to fast sports use, but very usable otherwise
Video as with 5D2
Screen as per 5D2
Ergonomic improvements with grips – some buttons moved
Feels faster and more responsive in nearly all aspects of real use.
the 1D, as opposed to the 1DS, is mainly aimed at sports shooters. They all seem to value FPS over resolution or full-frame coverage. I would assume that Canon did what they have done on previous 1D models, and optimized for speed. I’m sure that when they release the specs of the 1DS, it will have the insane MP you were expecting.
Yeah, it makes perfect sense. 1D (non-s) models have never had high megapixel counts.
What I’m really hoping for is for Canon to move the high-ISO picture quality bar forward and grab the ring back from Nikon, who finally leapfrogged Canon in that department with the CMOS sensor in its D3/D700.
How well Canon can reduce the noise at higher ISO speeds would offset a lower pixel count. Most editors are willing to accept lower mp photos if the noise level is low.
“Are these the specs for the Canon 5D Mark IV?”
There isn’t even a 5D Mark III yet! (I know, it is a type.)
“type” => “typo”
16MP makes a lot of sense. The 1D series is sports shooter with high frame rate. For most of the applications of this type of camera, 16MP would be plenty if not overkill. In order to keep the high frame rate, (the 1D MkII can shoot up to 10fps), the mega pixel count probably had to be kept low enough to be able to process all of those images. I believe the author of this article has this camera confused with the 1Ds series.
Too bad…
It should be >21,1 MP…
Admin, you are clearly uninformed since you think that the 1D mkIV should have 21 MP sensor like the Ds mkIII and 5D mkII. if anything the fact that these two cameras have that resolution indicates the the 1D mk IV will not.
Increasing the pixels decreases the photosite size, lowering the inherent sensitivity of the sensor, and thus increasing the amount of signal noise at a given (be that native or boosted) sensitivity.
1D cameras are required to perform in low light scenarios, thus a moderate pixel count on a large sensor is preferred. this is how Canon came to dominance in the mk II and D2 era. the Canon 1D mkII had a 8.2 MP APS-H (1.3x) sized sensor and the Nikon D2H can a 4 mp DX sized (1.5x), even though the sensors had roughly the same density Canon’s better (at the time) sensor technology allowed them to win out in performance. Almost the same is true in the Nikon D3 outperforming the Canon 1D mk III (my current camera body).
Basically additional pixels isn’t a great benefit to 1D shooters because it compromises critical low light performance and has no benefit given the size that out images are outputted to.
Also since there is always a limit to the processor the additional resolution would reduce the motordrive (continuous shooting speed) of the camera, which is unacceptable considering that a large constituency of the 1D shooters are professional sports photographers.
Given the 5D mkII’s performance with a single digic IV processor running 21.1 MP 14 bit @ 3.9 fps, which is already 80% of the 1Ds mkIII’s dual digic III processors. the dual digic IV of the 1D mk IV (all 1 series digital bodies operate a dual processor of digic corresponding to their mark) the 1D mk IV should be capable of running 16 MP 14 bit at 10 fps, the same frame rate as the current 1D mk III. however, at 21.1 MP the camera’s motordrive would be approximately 7.8 fps, which would not be tolerated as it would then be slower than the original 1D released in 2001 which could shoot at 8 or 8.5 (not sure) fps.
furthermore this is keeping with Canon’s previous releases. The original 5D was released at a time to be most contemporary with the 1D mk II and 1Ds mk II the 1D was 8.2 MP and the 1Ds 16.7 MP. with the 5D supporting a role as a lower end high resolution with 12.7 MP, but low speed body. even the later 1D mk III had a lower resolution, at 10.1 MP than the original 5D launched several years earlier.
What I find peculiar about this particular set of information is the retention of the APS-H sized 1.3x sensor. the APS-H sensor was originally created because it could be created fairly inexpensively in a single stepping as opposed to a stitched stepping like early Full frame sensors. this is no longer a factor, as the 5D mk II’s price tag will tell you. full frame yields potentially more resolution and better noise performance than a smaller sensor, as well as a noticably larger and brighter viewfinder with better background blur, and full functionality of ultra wide angle lenses.
The retort to that is that the 1.3x sensor gives you additional telephoto ‘reach’. That’s a nice theroy, but its only true in comparison to a sensor of less pixel density. for example, that would be true comparing a 10 MP 1.3 sensor to a 10 MP full frame sensor. however, the same pixel density could be used as a 1.3x sensor to yield a sensor with 1.76 x the area, and therefore resolution. So, inspired by Nikon’s break through D3, Canon should make the next 1D a full frame camera, since a lot of the target market for this camera is also wedding shooters and photojournalists, all of whom prefer Full frame cameras. I don’t think the sports shooters would mind since a FF camera would have better noise performance, enabling them to use a 1.4x teleconverter with their long lenses, and absorb the lost f/stop of light in the additional ISO sensitvity.
Ainda não vi comentários de que a canon Mark IIII vai vir com o Wirelles acoplado na câmera. Alguém tem noticías?
What most professional sports shooters want is the ability to focus on moving subjects in often low light with lightning speed, and zero noise. The “Megapixel Race” means little. I would gladly sacrifice a few MP’s to get a truly accurate, fast auto focus, and the ability to shoot at 25600 with no noise. This is what Canon needs to be concentrating on… not cramming a few more megapixels on to the sensor.
+1 !!
i would love a canon top line rig, IF IT FOCUSED
no one is really talking about this issue, you can have all the gizmos and spec numbers you want
but if the camera does not focus and is tack sharp why bother, i left canon, for NIKON i know a hell sin, but i have to pay bills and clients do not want excuses, Love the D3 razor sharp, for real. if CANON can get it together a produce a winner in the MARK 4, I WILL buy a couple of bodies, still have my old glass. just waiting, feel like i am rolling a pair of DICE, “come on DADDY NEEDS A NEW PAIR OF SHOES” lets go CANON
you can do it, DO IT
http://img269.imageshack.us/img269/6844/1dmk4.jpg