First Spec List
This is the first spec list I have received about the 1Ds Mark IV.
The person that sent this in stressed the 1Ds Mark IV will not set the benchmark for video performance in the Canon lineup. It’s felt the camera is too big for a lot of people. There will be a more video oriented full frame camera coming. The 1Ds Mark IV is a still camera first.
Specifications
-32mp CMOS (New Sensor Technology)
Noise control wasn’t the primary goal of the sensor, dynamic range is.
-Dual DIGIC V
The new sensor requires a new processor, This will be the 2nd camera with DIGIC V.
-5 FPS
No increase in shooting speed.
-Video Features
Video will be about the same as the 1D Mark IV feature wise. There may be a couple of extra bells and whistles.
-Live View
Contrast detection AF will be the fastest yet on a Canon DSLR.
-Form Factor
The camera will be nearly the same shape as the 1D Mark IV. Do not expect any ergonomic upgrades
-Flash Master
There will be a built in flash master to work with a new Canon speedlite.
-Announcement in August
Expect this to receive a separate press announcement.
CR’s Take
Canon is always very incremental with upgrades to the EOS-1’s. A part of me cannot see the camera getting DIGIC V when the 1D has DIGIC IV.
I will agree that it will not be a flagship video camera.
I’d be surprised if it doesn’t come with an improved version of the 7D electronic level.
This could be the beginning of the spec madness. Take it with a grain of salt.
cr
View full post on Canon Rumors
Hi,
May be it’ll come with a CCD sensor… notice CCD sensor start appearing back to canon product.
If we take the rumor as stated as true, then I believe what the guy actually saying is that ISO will be at current 5D2 levels and not reach the sky high levels present in the D3s.
The 1Ds line is competing with the lower-end of the MFDB range. The medium format cameras have great DR but not just great high ISO either.
2K video is basically 2048×1080. 1920×1080 is not far off from that.
The 32MP rumour with improved dynamic range sounds a bit implausible to me – especially if it is different sensor technology.
While in terms of pixel density 32MP on FF will be well below an 18MP APS-C sized sensor, I somehow can’t feel Canon would throw two larger upgrades into one sensor – especially with a statement like “noise control wasn’t a focus”.
A lot of people go whinging about how Nikons are so much better at low ISO and have so little noise…
(BUT: I’m not printing)
Well, I find my 5D MK II absolutely fine on ISO 3200 – and for small images very useable at 6400 – no complaints from me
Considering that – I couldn’t imagine Canon increasing the pixel count without keeping ISO noise at least at the MK II level – dynamic range has been upgraded in the past too – so that’s not implausible in small steps.
However – throwing these thing together seems a bit far fetched to me.
On that ntoe – I could be proven wrong though… time will tell.
Whatever happens – I won’t afford a 1Ds anyway… (and the only thing I personally could benefit from is weather sealing – else the 5D MK II “my level”)
Actually, that would be a pretty good idea – maybe even split the image into 4 “sectors” – it might increase file sizes for JPEG a bit but then you could move the processors to different spaces in the camera body – which would allow for efficient cooling.
Patent that idea and sell it to Canon
– it should be quite doable – especially in RAW.
Or alternatively – procesor 1 get’s first image, processor 2 second and so on…
What might become a limit is the CF card write speed… or buffer – but buffer – add a spare backup battery – give the cameras a smallish internal SSD for ermergency bbuffer dumps and that would be sorted…
On a 1Ds surely that could be implemented with a fair profit margin.
There is more to a large aperture than just a “brighter image” given that exposure and ISO are set to the same value.
A larger aperture also gives you a shallower depth of field.
I never erall noticed it on my 400D – but started to play a bit with it on my 5D MK II where is easier to get – and much more noticeable and better too.
Only problem for me is – my largest aperture lense is the 50mm f1.8 II – I’d really need a better lense – but haven’t got the money for it.
Lol, the “war of computer cores” exported to the DSLRs world…
Hopefully, if that ever happens, they won’t need fan coolers
Agreed. I really don’t understand the clamor for 35mm 1.2 or 135mm 1.8. Put the engineering into improving performance at the apertures which are by far more often used in day to day photography.
Drop the 85mm to 1.4 and maybe it will finally handle better than the average shot put.
F/1.2 brings much more benefit to Canon in terms of bragging rights that it does to photographers in taking good pictures.
How about a “QUAD” Digic IV Processors instead of dual Digic Vs ?? :p
@ed
I always thought the f/8 mtfs on the 1.2s were really quite impressive. In any case I’d be perfectly happy with 1.4 refreshes if it translated to excellnt performNce throughout the aperture range.
Exactly.
Video uses line skipping.
XF Codec, perhaps?
It’s been my idle observation that the MTF curves are significantly higher on the “slower” lenses than on the 1.2Ls, not just on the black (wide open) lines, but at the f8 blues as well. Those 1.2Ls are optimized for wide open, not for reasonable photography. But piggybacking on what you said, is there really all that much distance in ISO improvements towards being able to shoot f/4 L lenses at any time of day (or night)? Usable 25600 seems more than enough.
Definitely agree, though, that it’s time for DR – especially on the consumer DSLRs, but I’m cheap.