Slashdot Mirror
Canon Unveils EOS 5D Mark IV DSLR (canonrumors.com)
It's been a little more than 4 year since Canon unveiled the EOS 5D Mark III. Today, Canon took the wraps off its successor -- the EOS 5D Mark IV. The Mark IV features a 34-megapixel, full-frame CMOS sensor and Digic 6+ processor with support for capturing 4K video at 23.98, 24, 25 and 30 fps. In addition, it features a 61-point autofocus system, built-in digital lens optimizer, NFC, Wi-Fi and an ISO range of 100-32,000. The continuous shooting mode is set at 7 fps, compared to 6 fps on the 5D Mark III. It will also take both CompactFlash and SD cards, and there is GPS included in the body for geotagging images. Canon is selling the Mark IV in early September for $3,499 for the body only. They're also selling two new L-series EF lenses -- the Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III USM Ultra-Wide Zoom Lens and EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM Standard Zoom Lens. President and COO, Canon U.S.A., Inc, Yichi Ishizuka said in a statement: "Canon's EOS 5D series of DSLR cameras has a history of being at the forefront of still and video innovation. And today, we add to this family of cameras the EOS 5D Mark IV -- the first in our 5D series to offer 4K video and built-in Wi-Fi and NFC connectivity. In developing this new DSLR camera, we listened to the requests of current EOS users to create for them a modern, versatile camera designed to help them create and share beautiful still and video imagery." Here's a blast from the past: Canon's EOS 1Ds Mark II. Slashdot reader LoudMusic submitted this story back in 2004, highlighting the camera's "802.11a/g and wired networking capabilities."
I think the camera manufacturers all realise that, especially at the high-end. Sure, they'll play the MP numbers game at the low-end where people don't know better and it translates into sales but all the prosumer and pro models generally offer a trade-off of MP vs. ISO suitable for the model at high; e.g. high-MP/low-ISO for the Canon 5DS, mid-MP/mid-ISO for the the Canon 5D and low-MP/high-ISO for the Canon 1DX. Assuming you are competent and understand what you need the camera(s) for and how you plan on using it, you'll choose accordingly.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
True but the image will always suffer from less thermal noise on an equivalent sensor with larger photosites. See Sony's video targeted A7S - BSI sensor with large photosites and usable high ISO without excessive noise. Similar with Sony's A6300, downscaling from a 6k bayer sensor for 4k output. Of course Sony's color science is putrid.
"Digic X" vs "Digic Y" tells you which is newer, and whether Canon thinks the newer one is enough better to deserve a bump in the major version number. You do still need to get other stats to decide whether, for you, the cost delta is worth the performance delta.
True if you want to just put the family photos on line or the food you ate today. You take 4 or 5 pictures and put the best one online. However if you want to go for a quality shot, you most likely will do at least some color correction in Lightroom or something similar. You will have made pictures in RAW, edit them and then reduce them to size.
The more information you have, the better the end will be after editing.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
To some other ancient camera body... still rocking the 300D here. Still works. Still takes more than adequate photos, since I'm not doing print.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Full frame (35 mm format) cameras give you a smaller depth of field at the same aperture, because the focal length of the lenses is longer than it would be with a smaller sensor. And, you can get a larger depth of field without diffraction at higher apertures -- f/16, f/22 than you can with a smaller sensor. Better yet, look at a medium format camera -- like a digital sensor equipped Hasselblad, and you will see that larger sensors have advantages.
What kind of menu do you want? There is a lot of information and settings that have to be presented to the use
There really isn't. Not on the camera itself anyway. 95% of the menu setting never get touched or get set once and never touched again so why do they need to be in a crappy interface at all?
Professional photographers change their settings regularly. So do advanced hobbyists. Nobody else needs a DSLR, so this is a complete non-problem. If you find DSLR settings confusing, you would almost certainly do just fine with a super zoom compact.
You are going to interface the camera with a computer at some point so why not offload the menus for the rarely/never used settings to a PC or tablet?
Because I need to be able to change the setting quickly, and also while holding the camera with both hands. I might be on a moving vehicle. I might be in a constricted space where I can't let the camera go and let it hang on its strap. I might need to change the setting faster than I can get my phone out of my pocket.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Funny when Canon brags "has a Digic 6+ processor", since Digic is Canon proprietary used exclusively by Canon, and we users have no idea what that really means. So, "has a Digic X processor" is only relevant after checking the FPS, and how long it takes to process the images currently in buffers.
The Digic processor is known for being very, very good. Yes, it's proprietary and unique to Canon. That doesn't mean it's irrelevant; it's presence is a feature, and not all Canon cameras have it.
For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
Even I'm bothered by how this advertisement made it to the front page.
The 5D series is notable because the Mk II revolutionized video production. Everyone from teenagers to AAA Hollywood production units were using them. They weren't a replacement for cameras costing tens of thousands more, but they were close enough for most shots.
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!