Canon 1D MarkIV

nomix

True Viking
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
7,293
Location
Norway
Car(s)
Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
yous guys know that you don't have to shoot at the highest available resolution, right? Instead of whining about the resolution being too high and the files too large, hit a couple buttons and change the resolution. It's not rocket surgery.
Not always as easy when you shoot RAW (some cameras let you shoot resized RAWs, but they are generally the exception).

And you really don't get as good ISO performance by resizing as you get if the pixel count was lower to start with.
 

IceBone

Blue Wheel Hipster
DONOR
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Messages
27,169
Location
Slovenistan
Car(s)
Audi A5 Quattro
I shoot in raw, there's no resolution option, I won't have to worry if I or the camera choose the wrong white balance setting and I have far more leeway to play with when it comes to rescuing a poorly exposed photo, eeking detail out of the shadows or just playing with post processing.

So yes, I DO have to shoot at the highest possible resolution.
 

evoWALO

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
1,619
Location
Philippines / Naples, Florida
Watch the video below on why Canon increased the MP, added HD, Picture Styles, HDMI and PictureBridge. You do know that you can lower the MP via Small Fine, Medium Fine, Large Fine, sRAW, sRAW1, sRAW2, RAW, etc., right?

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGVXqba4BJg[/YOUTUBE]

You will be surprised by what professionals needs vs your assumptions about some rich amateur that owns a Ferrari wants. Rich amateurs tend to use their crappy celphone to do videos because they can't be bothered to make a higher production car video.

From personal experience I wouldn't mind a million megapixels at a million ISO and only need to bring one short slow lens. Lugging around 4kg of camera is pain what more 10kg of camera?

1D Mark IV ISO tests
Tests from pre-production camera from Photo Plus Expo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/slvrscoobie/sets/72157622649772276/

NIKON WHORES ... Ah ye know the rest by now ...

[rant]

Anyways, I think its a step in the wrong direction for the 1D range. It might be just me but I've always envisioned the 1D as the tough, fast, no nonsense Canon camera. It's previous brethren were not only sports cameras but used in war time situations around the globe. They needed to be fast with reasonable file sizes for passing onto agencies. Now they have full HD video, Picture styles, HDMI inputs and Pictbridge ?

It doesn't need 16MP, 11MP was more than enough for the situations it was designed for. An 11MP image can be printed at 300DPI at A1 no problems ! Why do we need more ? (I'm aware of the irony of this coming from the guy who just bought a 21MP 5D2 but I have my reasons) Anything including and above ISO 12,800 is ridiculous anyways, its completely unusable.

It feels like Canon have diluted the bloodline of the 1D by adding features that are only ever going to be used by rich amateurs with too much money and not enough sense.

I can't see the likes of James Nachtwey stopping in the middle of a firefight, to change his picture stlye to a low saturation, high contrast look.

Then shooting some video to post on YouTube.

Before connecting it directly to a printer and offering the prints to those people knocking seven shades of shit out of each other.

[/rant]
 
Last edited:

Dr_Q

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
1,084
Location
United Kingdom of Englandlandshire
Car(s)
Horse & Cart
evoWALO, please get the 100 f/2 macro as a companion for your 50 f/1.4, it will make your camera happier and thus not create so much noise (I may have made part or all of what I've just said up).
 

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
Hehe ... but, seriously, if you have it on a tripod and you're way out of focus anyway, why crank the ISO? And I'm assuming here because there's no EXIF, but that can't possibly be the base ISO of Canon's latest full-frame offering.
 

evoWALO

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
1,619
Location
Philippines / Naples, Florida
Hehe ... but, seriously, if you have it on a tripod and you're way out of focus anyway, why crank the ISO? And I'm assuming here because there's no EXIF, but that can't possibly be the base ISO of Canon's latest full-frame offering.
f/1.4 with focus on the carl zeiss font

1/30 shutter

light is a 10 watt CFL Philips

ISO is 400

Quality of the light fucks up the image. :) If you want a quality JPEG



EXIF http://www.flickr.com/photos/alabang/4315744119/meta/

Full 10fps sequence AI Servo http://www.flickr.com/photos/alabang/sets/72157623189329919/
 

nomix

True Viking
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
7,293
Location
Norway
Car(s)
Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
Fine and dandy, but if we're supposed to pixel peep, we won't get far with a small JPEG.
 

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
f/1.4 with focus on the carl zeiss font

1/30 shutter

light is a 10 watt CFL Philips

ISO is 400
That exposure must be way off for it to be that noisy at ISO 400
 

Top Geek

Forum Addict
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
10,837
Location
Canadaland :)
Car(s)
1995 Nissan 240SX
But, really? At ISO 400? I was thinking that was severely underexposed and brought up in post for it to be that noisy.
 

Dr_Q

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
1,084
Location
United Kingdom of Englandlandshire
Car(s)
Horse & Cart
If you look at the full size photographs, the ISO is 2000 according to the exif :). God knows about the photograph before that, let's hope that it is the same.
 

nomix

True Viking
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
7,293
Location
Norway
Car(s)
Tend do walk the 40 meters from my bed to lecture.
The photograph before tht is obviously underexposed, for ISO2000, I'd say the full size sample images are decent. Not up to D700 or 5D standards, though, I believe.

But it's hard to say, as I was not there when the photos were taken, nor did I have a 5D2 or a D700 to compare with, and if I had, it wouldn't had mattered, as I wasn't there.

:)
 

evoWALO

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2004
Messages
1,619
Location
Philippines / Naples, Florida
The photograph before tht is obviously underexposed, for ISO2000, I'd say the full size sample images are decent. Not up to D700 or 5D standards, though, I believe.

But it's hard to say, as I was not there when the photos were taken, nor did I have a 5D2 or a D700 to compare with, and if I had, it wouldn't had mattered, as I wasn't there.

:)
The AI servo shots were done using a 300/2.8L IS + Extender 1.4x II. So the IQ isn't all that great. The shots if I recall were of mixed lighting on a Manual Mode setting. The shutter & f-stop were fixed while the camera was on Auto ISO. I love the 1D4's implementation of Auto ISO. It is way less retarded than the 40D & 5D2.

As for the noise of the shot I didn't process it and exported it to Photoshop to flip it so the font would be readable. Not to mention the light was really really bad. Sometimes the quality of the light is more important than the quantity.

Not to make excuses but this is my first pro body and using it would take time.

I'd love to get a Zeiss but let it have focusing motor. :)
 
Last edited:
Top