UPDATE - latest Canon 1D Mark IV specs:
- 16 Mpix
- Dual DIGIC
- Native sensitivity of ISO 25.600
- Boost to ISO 102.400
- 12fps
- 1080p @ 24/25, 30 & 60 fps
CanonRumors reports that there will be a Canon event in Australia On October 20th. The main theme is the 50th anniversary of Canon SLR. Of course a new camera announcement is expected and according to CanonRumors this will be the 1D Mark 4 with very high ISO. This sounds like a logical response to Nikon's D3s 102400 ISO that was released few days ago (see low-light D3s video here).
Related posts:
25 Comments
What I would like, if this is true, is that Canon does bother to make an announcement for a special year, Nikon has totally gone past some milestones without even making an announcement (I guess sometimes there was a press release that it had happened or something)
a poor answer from Canon, when one cannot lead
Care to elaborate on your statement?
Lets see Canon does 1080P and is not stuck at 720P video.
Canon has multiple SLRs with over 12MegPixels in assrted price ranges – not stuck at 12 MegPixels.except for the top range A900 copy.
Canon is able to bring 100% Frame Coverage viewfinders to mid-level product – just like Sony did with the A900. Where’s the 100% Frame Coverage viewfinder on anything less than a D3X? I believe it is “approx” 100% on the new D3S (check specs on Dpreview site for D3S and 7D – D3S is “approx” while the 7D is 100% Frame Coverage).
Canon’s Rebel line opened up DSLR market to the masses and started the era of affordable DSLRs.
Canon DSLR sensors have been the low noise sensors to beat – across whole line, not just top end. While Sony’s smaller sensors have been hard to beat and are used in the majority of P&S cameras, including Canon’s. Where are Nikon’s sensors used? Hint – last one was in the D1X (D2 line I believe were not Nikon sensors).
Note Im not bashing any company as Im a camera agnostic – use what works to get a job done. Im just pointing out facts which disprove “loickeri”‘s contention.
Also, Canon did not do a MKIIIn update model, so any enhancements which were to be in the “n” camera would be moved and further improved in the MKIII replacement.
What enhancements? (after reading comments all over the place) an AF that works?
1)The D3x is superior to any other high resolution DSLR in terms of resolving power, colour accuracy, colour depth, dynamic range and ISO performance. i.e. it is the best that’s out there.
2)All cameras that say that have 100% vf coverage only have approx. 100%
3)Yes, maybe canon did open up dslrs to the masses, but that doesn’t mean anything in the present
4)Nikon used their own sensor in the D3, which they have just changed for the D3s, and had altered the D3x’s sensor (that’s part of the reason for the performance difference between the D3x and the A900. Anyway, who cares what sensor they use, as long as they are better than the others? The D3x is the best in its category out there, as is the D3s. The D300s may not be with the 7D, but the D90 remains superior to the topend rebel series, as does the D5000.
7D coverage is identical to D300′s. 100% viewfinder are easier to design with small sensors (think APS-C, APS-H compared to FF).
Anyway, the best viewfinders I found are in the medium-format cameras.
Concerning viewfinder coverage, the design complexity depends on the sensor size. Designing a 100% viewfinder will be more expensive with FF than on smaller sensors ( think APS-C/APS-H ).
By example, the price of Sony’s A850 was cut down by reducing its viewfinder coverage, among few others changes.
Anyway, the viewfinders of MF cameras dont cover 100%, yet they are much brighter than on the FF studio-camera-wanabees.
http://nikonrumors.com/2008/12/02/nikon-d3x-sensor-made-by-sony-designed-by-nikon.aspx
“On December 1, 2008 Nikon USA issued a correction to the pixel pitch specification, restating it as 5.94µm – the same as the A900?”
“Nikon officials were at pains to point out that although the D3X’s sensor is manufactured in a Sony plant”
“Anyway, who cares what sensor they use”
Well the post was about a camera firm showing leadership. Canon, Sony and Samsung produce their own sensors. Nikon uses Sony sensors. I suspect that if Nikon produced their own sensors and Canon did not then you would be raving about Nikon’s leadership in Sensors production. But since Nikon does not, you say “who cares” about the fact that Samsung, Sony and Canon actually produce the sensor found in their DLSRs.
“)The D3x is superior to any other high resolution DSLR in terms of resolving power, colour accuracy, colour depth, dynamic range and ISO performance. i.e. it is the best that’s out there.”
Nonsense. The Leica S2 (a DSLR actually a tad smaller in physical size to the D3X) is superior in many of the areas you state. The A900 uses the same sensor so is pretty much the same in most areas except high ISO and for a 3rd of the price.. The Canon 5DMK2 is pretty much the same for a heck of lot less.
I “highly” doubt that you could see any difference in a large print of a studio shot (to control lighting) made with any of the cameras I mentioned. Im pretty confident that you would not be able to walk in the room and without a doubt state said enlargement was made using a D3X shot (or A900 or 1DS or 5dmk2) – using same lense size and same framing. A reputable web site did a comparison betwen enlargements made with a Canon G10 and a top of the line Hasselblad – pros could not tell the difference. That was a huge difference in format size and visible difference did not really exist.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/kidding.shtml
“2)All cameras that say that have 100% vf coverage only have approx. 100%”
Wrong, their specifications are very specific. Nikon states that the D3S is approximately 100% while the lower priced 7D and A900 state 100% Frame Coverage. Thats why they are called specifications and not approximations. Of course the 100% frame coverage is with a standard lens It has to do with the cost of manufacture and the precision of alignment of the mirror box and the sensor and the viewfinder. Legally if not 100% then one has to say it is only approx 100%. Have a look in Leica Rumors at the Leica M9 testing videos. Leica tests and corrects the rangefinder accuracy on a fixed test bed at assorted focal lengths.
It takes a lot of time and money. Most DSLR are not 100% frame coverage because of the cost of time and money during the production and testing process to achive it.
-The D3x is modified; it has different filters, etc., and thus improved performance.
-I said ‘who cares’ because all that matters is which sensors you use. The fact that Nikon doesn’t use own brand sensors does give it any disadvantage whatsoever, so long as the image quality stands up.
-I maintain my point about the sensor quality of the D3x (yes the S2 is superior in this regard, but that is an entirely segment of the market than to what we are talking about). It is clearly documented that the colour depth and dynamic range of the D3x is higher than that of any other sub-35mm DSLR – this, I think, is its most substantial advantage. The D3 is the second highest. Furthermore, the resolving power of the D3x’s sensor is superior to that of the A900, due to use of a weaker anti-aliasing filter. I agree that the difference is small in this regard, but Nikon remains the market leader by a considerable margin if you were to consider the total advantage gained in every aspect of image quality. MP do matter for many applications, and the LL example you posted is a poor one – maybe 0.5% of photos from the G9 after editing will be near comparable to identical ones from a Hasselblad. It depends very much on the situation, and the extent to which flexibility in post is required.
-The reason why the M9 is tested is that RF designs can vary hugely from the supposed coverage – after all, you aren’t seeing through the lens. We are talking about SLRs. It is just due to a different approach in Nikon’s marketing that they state the values as “approximate”. The same is true of any SLR.
There will never be a Canon 1D MKIV. The replacement for the 1D MKIIl will arrive in 2010. News Services have been playing with it and Nikon’s new D3S. That being the case, there has not been a sudden mass migration by Major News Services to Nikon’s new D3S. Yes they had previously purchased D3 and will buy D3S, but the majority are also staying with Canon. At major sporting events, yes there are “now” Nikon shooters, “but” the majority are still shooting white lenses. The white lens count at sporting events will start to increase again in 2010 when Canon’s new model is launched and Nikon shooters switch to Canon.
Canon has a lot of damage control after the Mk3 debacle. How many of those white lens users are still using a 1DMkIIn?
Even after the Mk3 was released Canon was STILL using images shot with that camera (IIn) in their promos for sports photography with Canon equipment. I think they know they goofed with the Mk3, and perhaps they’ve made concessions privately (like trade in Mk3 for the MkIV). But they have too much ground to make up.
“How many of those white lens users are still using a 1DMkIIn?”
LOTS of them.
Of late we no longer see the number of msgs popping up about focusing issues with the MKIII. So, “maybe” Canon figured out what was the cause and newer built units had finally resolved the issue. The multiple attempts at a fix and asstd coloured dots on retail boxes could have been funny until one realized that it could happen to you next time around and how would you feel.
I think all Canon users (and those using other brands) will, in the end, gain great benefit from the MKIII “fiasco”. Canon, and other brands will very likely take more time to beta test their product before unleashing same on unsuspecting public. For a while I think many vendors will think twice about rushing any product to market.
Because of that I also believe that the MKIII replacement will be a game changer for Canon’s Pro line (as the D3 was for Nikon). It should be an amazing camera and likely will be hard to buy due to low production levels and growing demand. I suspect that it will be harder to buy than the D3 was when it came out.
Canon’s MKIII replacement, Pentax’s FF, Sony’s new flagship models, Pentax’s MF (maybe), Nikon’s 24MP FF middle price range model, Canon’s 1DSMKIII replacement, Canon and Sony’ mirrorless ESLRs, Sigma’s FF Foveon etc etc. 2010 will be great year for those into Digital Photography.
Wow – Canon actually called it the MKiV.. Never expected Canon to overcome the stigma of the number 4.
I’ve got to the point where I hate Canon cameras now, I much more prefer Nikon cameras.
What about your Leica M9?
It’s interesting D3S is announced before 1D4, being 1D3 is half year ahead of D3. If you look at recent Canon/Nikon history, the latter announcement usually accompanies superior product (1D3/D3, 40D/D300, D700/5Dii, D300s/7D). It’s more interesting to see what lens will be released along side 1D4.
How are D3s and 1D4 of the same class? D3s is an update, while a 1D4 is an upgrade, which is 2 years to get something that can compete (at least so you say). Most of all, D300s/ 7D, it took Canon also 2 years to have a (real) competitor to the D300, and coincidently it was the 7D shortly announced after the D300s.
That’s why I say Nikon is standing still but the world has moved on. And don’t forget how long it took nikon to rival 5D and 1D2.
Why all the hate? We can all get along. Make photos – Not war.
After reading comment threads here I wonder if an “ethnic cleansing” of Canon users would take place if Nikonians were ever to take power.
I dont think that would ever happen, otherwise us Nikon users will be stuck with the same technology for many ages to come, let the competition continue, and the hate lessen, we can learn from each other
“After reading comment threads here I wonder if an “ethnic cleansing” of Canon users would take place if Nikonians were ever to take power.”
Interesting thought if camera brand ownership resulted in political power.
The extreme so called fanboyism is an American invention.Japanese camera firms are from a different culture of “mutual survival”. For Example: The big 3 (Canon, Sony and Nikon) could have easily put Olympus and Pentax to rest. Another example: Take Canon and Nikon they do not “usually” directly compete. They mutually coexist. Their products in each range (except for top of the line) are not direct feature for feature competitors. This allows both to continue tosurvive. Sony is a bit different of late since it has an American CEO – hence their recent move to price competition which can hurt their compeition. The American way is different – one firm will do what it can to grab as much market share for itself as possible, with total disregard to any damge it will cause by doing so.
UPDATE – latest Canon 1D Mark IV specs:
16 Mpix
Dual DIGIC
Native sensitivity of ISO 25.600
Boost to ISO 102.400
12fps
1080p @ 24/25, 30 & 60 fps
Any word on a new Canon Flash System to go along with the 1DMKIII replacement?
Their Flash System is one area where Nikon really has shown leadership and set a “very high” standard which Canon (and others) should try to at least match – better late than never.
They were partly wrong, haha, still stuck at 10 fps, no 12. No native ISO 25,600 just the same as the D3s. No 60 fps video at 1080p, only at 720p
A lot of folks were wrong – including me, Justin’s observations above were very good about model rollouts. For Canon’s sake I hope that no faults are found with the “new” AF system.