billnourse Loc: Bloomfield, NM

It's been official for 3 days and no comments??? Anyone with thoughts. I have been waiting for it as I want to go from 70d to full frame.

Bill

billnourse Loc: Bloomfield, NM

Never mind. I did find a thread. I just hadn't looked far enough. :)

Bill

tramsey Loc: Texas

Gopher it

TheDman Loc: USA

The announcement isn't the thing; it's the sample images / test results. This one is all about the dynamic range for me. Clean shadows. Everything else looks great, though.

Jolly Roger Loc: Dorset. UK

I watched four or five different reviews on it, then watched Tony Northrop's take on it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quwAvqcbLRw
One of his opening lines was that it is a "Jack of all trades, master of none".
The true litmus test will be once these reviewers have a chance to play with it for a few days.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Rockwell likes it.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

Rumors say that the new Canon 5D Mark IV will not accommodate the C-fast card. If true, that may be regrettable by Canon. Other than that, it appears very impressive.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

Hasn't the word on Rockwell been for a while that he likes anything Canon and bashes the Nikon gear? I tend to put a little more stock in Northrop review and Fro, Jared Polin. Fro did some real world testing of the 1Dx Mk II and seemed pretty happy with it for someone who normally is a Nikon shooter. I see the 5D Mk IV being very similar to the 1Dx Mk II feature and functionality wise, same ISO range, same focus system same video, or very similar. I'm not in tune with DSLR video at all though. Strong low light performance in both.

If you are a Canon shooter picking between these two it seems to me that it largely comes down to resolution and FPS needs. Between the 5DSr and the 5D Mk IV is interesting and gets into the issue of whether you really need 50 Mp and want to process that data all the time. I saw one review of the 5DSr that the reviewer said mostly he shoots it at 30mp, but occasionally needs 50mp.

The big question on the 5D Mk IV seems to be the card choices, no Cfast card, just CF and SD, especially for video. Interesting in that one could go 1Dx Mk II or for about the same money get the 5D Mk IV with a battery grip and the new 16-35 Mk III lens. Looking at those options it makes me say do I really need 14 FPS or would I be happy with 7 FPS and have a 30mp image vs a 20mp, and a nice new lens? Certainly something to think about. 7 FPS is probably fine for any non pro sports shooter in my view. Interesting questions for the BIF shooters too. Of course the real no money issue answer is just to have both, right... Or there is the skip the lens and go 5D Mk IV and 7D Mk II and get to 10 FPS for less money too.

But some feel the 7D Mk II is getting outdated a bit too. But I'm shooting a 1D Mk III which is now 9 years old and I get some nice photos. It was state of the art when new, but aren't they all!

Best,
Todd Ferguson
Harrisburg, NC

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

Bill, Canon 5D Mk IV OR Canon 5DSR ?? The 5DSR is a 50 megapixel at a cost of $3,700 while the Mk IV is about $3,500. What is the advantage of the Mark IV over the 5DSR ??
I have Nikons so I really don't know anything about Canon although if I could turn the calendar back in time, I think I would go the Canon path rather than Nikon.
~FiddleMaker

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

True, it is CF and SD card out of the gate. The Canon guys I watched said it was to protect the investment in cards that the 5D Mk III shooters have. I would rather have seen CF and Cfast like the 1Dx Mk II but the Cfast would be more for video and those cards are crazy expensive this early into their lifespan.

The 5D Mk IV has some really useful touch screen capability which is great. I wonder if a firmware upgrade for the 1Dx Mk II will be coming to give it the same functionality. That would be great. The hardware is the same screen wise so it should be possible.

Best,
Todd Ferguson
Harrisburg, NC

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

with regard to Ken Rockwell's supposed bashing nikon in favor of canon, i believe that is incorrect. his nikon df and nikon lens reviews should put that supposition to bed. i find his take on camera and digital systems very balanced, and incisive. what i like most about them is he really doesn't give a damn about numbers, but how the item performs in real life, in different and difficult situations.

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

I probably have a little more faith in DPreview, Fro and Northrop at this point. But your mileage may, as they say, vary. I try to look at as many reviews as I can to get a wide range of inputs. I think that just makes sense. Fro seems very much about real world results to me, Northrop seems about bang for the buck and sone tech issues. DPreview seems pretty good to me too. But there will be lots of info out there very soon.

Bottom line is every camera is going to be a compromise in some way or another. You are always chasing the feature, function and technology curve. Sort of like computers, most people reach a point where they have enough at a price point they like and tend to stay at that level I believe. But pros will always be chasing.

Best,
Todd Ferguson
Harrisburg, NC

wj cody Loc: springfield illinois

hi Todd,
and thanks for your response. i agree that no one camera does it all. for my film work i use leica, nikon, hasselblad, rollei 6008i, linhof technikardan and ica tropical 5x7 cameras. i've 2 digital devices. the pentax optio mx for images of stuff i'm selling on ebay and a nikon df for digital. between them all, i probably have 30 lenses, including one from the 1920's for the ica, which i really love.

i've been a pro, but have never "chased" the supposedly newest. i came to depend on what worked for me and the art directors. many of my lenses, for instance, are more than over 20 years old, and still perform as well as they did the day i bought them.

professional photographers, and art photographers tend to be conservative with regards to equipment. now, oh boy, here we go, the industry is full of hacks and mediocre people. those tend to be always on the lookout for something new or more enabling for them. these people rely on the digital or film device the way a drunk uses a lamp post - to lean on. and they make, usually, a good living, and i will not argue that fact.

the good pros, know their equipment and have no need to rely on something new. in the correct hands, it is amazing the images produced by a nikon d1h, 1.6 megapixel body, for instance. the late Galen Rowell made most of his photographs using his nikon fm and the 24mm f2.8 nikkor lens; and believe me, no one could have made better pictures.

in this day of "immediacy" and remember, i'm an old guy of 70, i find digital imaging, for the most part, indicative of a lack of thought and skill. again, most look for the latest computerised device they can find, so it will do "something else" for them, rather than having to bring something of their own to the final image; and, of course, everything must be in colour - talk about a narrowness of vision!

so enough of my rant. do appreciate your reply. all the best to you.
cody

philo Loc: philo, ca

when you put the mark iv and the two new lens together you have a 8k to 9k package. I think I will stay with my mark 2 and someday move to the 3.

TheDman Loc: USA

Yet you have two digital cameras, so clearly you lack thought and skill.