Story   Photographer   Editor   Student/Intern   Assistant   Job/Item

SportsShooter.com: The Online Resource for Sports Photography

Contents:
 Front Page
 Member Index
 Latest Headlines
 Special Features
 'Fun Pix'
 Message Board
 Educate Yourself
 Equipment Profiles
 Bookshelf
 my.SportsShooter
 Classified Ads
 Workshop
Contests:
 Monthly Clip Contest
 Annual Contest
 Rules/Info
Newsletter:
 Current Issue
 Back Issues
Members:
 Members Area
 "The Guide"
 Join
About Us:
 About SportsShooter
 Contact Us
 Terms & Conditions


Sign in:
Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features.

Name:



Password:







||
SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board

Canon 1D4 Opinions
Gregory Greene, Photographer
Durham | NH | USA | Posted: 10:10 AM on 12.24.09
->> From reading other forums it looks like the first trickle
of Canon 1D4's are being sold. Just wondering if
anyone here has one or was testing it? Has Canon
released people from NDA's yet?

I'm still using my 1D2 but it is getting long in the tooth
and I'm interested in other sports shooters opinions on
the capabilities of the new model. I avoided the 1D3 as
the problems that plagued it scared me off but I would
love it if Canon got it right with the 1D4. To be honest
I really don't need the extra pixels but the cleaner high
ISO will be most welcomed.

Happy Holidays to everyone.

Greg
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Matthew Sauk, Photographer
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 11:24 AM on 12.24.09
->> Gregory,

I know this isn't answering your question, but here are some links to raw files and images

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=34047002

jpeg files I believe
http://www.flickr.com/photos/eddale/sets/72157622931495495/
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Gregory Greene, Photographer
Durham | NH | USA | Posted: 11:51 AM on 12.24.09
->> Thanks Matthew,

I've been reading the various threads on it and looking at
the samples. So far the high ISO looks pretty nice. I
posted here mainly to see what the AI-SERVO AF was like
since most here are sports photographers. There is so much
bantering back and forth about the AF (and the inevitable
1D3 debate) in other forums that I was hoping for a hands
on evaluation here.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David Welker, Photographer, Student/Intern
Springfield | MO | USA | Posted: 12:08 PM on 12.24.09
->> Gregory,

Here is a link to my post on another forum. I used a pre production model and I gave my assessment. Now I will just add, When I had the opportunity to use it I did not have a card on me, as It was at a lecture and I had no idea Canon was sponsoring the event. So take my words for what they are worth- a grain of salt.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=9251537&postcount=1365

Here is the thread:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=769494&page=28
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 12:10 PM on 12.24.09
->> http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/2316
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Ed Mulholland, Photographer
Pompton Lakes | NJ | USA | Posted: 1:21 PM on 12.24.09
->> Greg,

I did use one in November at a fight, and I found the autofocus to be top notch, the high iso was much, much better than my Mark III. Keep in mind I'm one of the lucky one's I guess, I've always been satisfied with my Mark III and it's performance, with that said, I found the Mark IV to be vastly better, and I'll be picking one up...

Ed
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Matthew Sauk, Photographer
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 1:28 PM on 12.24.09
->> I wish I had 5 grand to spoil myself with! lol Even then I am not sure I would because the 7D has been that good to me.

I love the fact that the files are big and even when cropping you still have a large image dimension wise.

So far the Mark IV even with the bigger 16meg files is looking great at high ISO. 12500 looks like 6400 ISO on the Mark III. Very usable.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Gregory Greene, Photographer
Durham | NH | USA | Posted: 8:24 PM on 12.24.09
->> I'm definitely looking forward to January and hope the units
aren't too hard to come by. I'm keeping my 1D2 as a second
body as it still is terrific in good light.

I can see I'm going to have to pick up some larger CF cards
and probably some larger hard drives. Ahhhhhhh, the price
of progress. :)
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

August Miller, Photo Editor
Farmington | UT | USA | Posted: 6:13 PM on 12.26.09
->> Our newspaper is currently testing out a Mark IV. We wanted to put it through some real world testing, shooting in deep, dark high school gyms and candle light vigils etc. Places where it is hard to focus and the light is not that great, but places that we have to take photos in almost every day at a newspaper. Our management insisted that we perform real world testing before we committed to any purchases of new equipment. Frankly we had been somewhat disappointed with the performance of most of our Mark III's .

So far we have rotated the test camera through most of our staff giving each a chance to shoot with it at various events. We are currently testing out the video capabilities of the camera this weekend before we send it back to Canon.

The initial results so far have been outstanding. The autofocus is getting rave reviews from staffers that have used the camera. And the low light capabilities have been remarkable. One of our photographers used it to photograph a high school wrestling meet. He got an amazing shot of one of the wrestlers getting his elbow dislocated. He said that we would have never gotten the shot with his Mark III because of the low light capabilities of the Mark IV he was able to shoot at 1/640 rather than the normal 1/250 we normally use in this gym. He was able to freeze the action and the low noise and higher quality of the image made the moment even clearer.

Here are a couple of links to this photo which is in a photo gallery on our newspapers website and other photo galleries we have done with the Mark IV.

Wrestling photos: most of the images in this gallery are from the Mark IV. image #25 is the one I referred to above:
http://www.deseretnews.com/photo/gallery/hs/3253/High-school-wrestling-View...

Also go to this link and click on the High school basketball: Bingham vs. Brighton game it has 13 photos most of which were taken with the Mark IV at ISO's ranging from 1600 to 12,800.
http://www.deseretnews.com/photo/

And finally for an interesting comparison go to this gallery of images at a candle light vigil for a missing women Susan Powell. The images taken by our staff photographer Scott Winterton in Utah were taken with the Mark IV. The other images in the gallery where taken by another photographer up in Washington, state with different cameras. Here is the link:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705352897/Josh-Powell-has-left-Utah.html

When I get a chance I plan to post more information, images and links to video from our test of the Mark IV on my blog
http://augustmiller.blogspot.com/ once the cameras are officially at dealers for sale.
 This post is:  Informative (4) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Dan Powers, Photographer
Appleton | WI | USA | Posted: 11:37 PM on 12.26.09
->> So far I have shot prep hockey and basketball (as well as general news type pics) with the Mark IV and it has been awesome. Everything has been shot at either ISO 4000 or 5000. Clean files and awesome focusing. Tomorrow I shoot the Packers vs Seattle and hope to see how it handles a sporting event that is at a much faster pace. For me, this camera is a slam dunk...Dan.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Scott A. Schneider, Photographer
Minneapolis | MN | USA | Posted: 7:36 PM on 12.27.09
->> Another review: www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-10046-10433
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Jacob Langston, Photographer
Orlando | FL | | Posted: 9:06 PM on 12.27.09
->> We had the chance to test one out at work and I am very impressed. The auto focus is much improved over the Mark IIN and the high iso performance is amazing. I shot a recent indoor bowl game and started shooting at 14,000 iso. The files had some noise so I bumped it down to 10,000 and they looked amazing!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Brad Mangin, Photographer
Pleasanton | CA | USA | Posted: 4:15 PM on 12.29.09
->> I had the chance to shoot the Lions @ 49ers game with a Canon Mark IV on Sunday. Here are my thoughts, including a RAW file you can download and look at for yourself:

http://manginphotography.net/2009/12/finally-canon-gets-it-right-with-mark-.../
 This post is:  Informative (6) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Christopher Trim, Photographer
Elk Grove | CA | USA | Posted: 4:58 PM on 12.29.09
->> Brad,

Wow! The MK IV sounds like the camera the MK III should have been. Besides the 400 2.8 + 1.4 ext, did you have an opportunity to try out any other lenses? Now if Canon would do all of the MK III owners a solid and offer a trade in program, that would make for a great 2010.

Chris
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mark Peters, Photographer
Highland | IL | USA | Posted: 8:15 PM on 12.29.09
->> Adobe has updated their DNG converter to convert mkIV RAW files to DNG format (for those wanting to convert Brad's RAW file)

http://www.adobe.com/products/dng/
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Robert Catto, Photographer
Wellington | NZ | New Zealand | Posted: 8:40 PM on 12.29.09
->> Mark - if you're already on Photoshop CS4, just update to Camera Raw 4.6 (or for that matter, Lightroom 2.6) and it'll open 1DMkIV files no problem...no need to convert to DNG for that. For once the software is ahead of the camera!
R
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Dirk Dewachter, Photographer
Playa Del Rey | CA | USA | Posted: 11:11 PM on 12.29.09
->> Link to Adobe's Camera Raw 5.6 install for Mac. The plug in will open the raw file in CS4

http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=4621&fileID=4298
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Dennis Wierzbicki, Photographer
Plainfield | IL | USA | Posted: 12:11 PM on 12.30.09
->> FWIW, the latest version of Photo Mechanic will also display Brad's impressive file.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
Dallas | TX | Lower 48 | Posted: 12:36 PM on 12.30.09
->> We had one to test as well; I was able to use it at a few different sporting events.

Definitely an improvement over the III. I might be alone in thinking that my IIn's are still a little more consistent on the AF front, but again, this camera is light years ahead of its predecessor in that regard.

I give it a 7 -- one point off because I still managed to make suck-ass photos with it (note to Canon R&D -- make me a camera that helps me rise above mediocrity and I will be yours forever), and another two because it failed to make me more attractive to the Redskins Cheerleaders.

- gerry -
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (5) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Brad Mangin, Photographer
Pleasanton | CA | USA | Posted: 1:32 PM on 12.30.09
->> Christopher- I only used the camera with the 400 and nothing else. I had to send it back on Monday and did not have a chance to shoot anything else with it.

Gerry- I am glad you had good Mark IIn bodies. Mine sucked- BUT they were better than most of my Mark III bodies. I finally got one real decent Mark III from Canon this past summer that had white tape on the bottom of the camera- it was from their latest batch and worked better than the previous 8-10 I had tried.

Please remember that there are many folks out there who had wonderful experiences with their cameras and never had a problem. I believe those people like Chuck Liddy :-)

However- MORE people than usual had BAD Mark III cameras. So much so that the exodus to Nikon (helped with the special trade-ins that were offered) was off the charts. The perfect storm of a bad Canon camera and a terrific Nikon camera made for one of the most dramatic brand-conversions anyone has ever seen among professional photographers.
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Dan Powers, Photographer
Appleton | WI | USA | Posted: 3:00 PM on 12.30.09
->> I got to use the Mark IV for a short period of time. I shot hockey, basketball and football. I got some custom function settings from someone who had been using the camera quite a bit and I must say the camera was awesome. Really clean files at high ISO's (I think I shot at ISO 4000 and 5000...with a couple shots at 6400 and even 12,800 around the office) and the focus was dead on too. I used it with various lenses including a 300mm f/2.8, 400mm f/2.8 and a 600mm f/4...all with consistent results. I have never owned a Mark III (I have Mark IIN's currently), but, I used them quite a bit due to Canon letting me use them a few times for quite a long time. The Mark IV, in my opinion, blows both of them away. Hope to have one someday for sure...Dan.
 This post is:  Informative (2) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Yamil Sued, Photographer, Photo Editor
Peoria | AZ | USA | Posted: 2:27 PM on 12.31.09
->> Brad,

Thanks for posting your Images and Opinions!!

I downloaded the RAW File and I was impressed.

BTW, the "PRO's" over at DPR have a differing opinion!!

This is one of the funniest reads!!

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1032&message=34100200
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

August Miller, Photo Editor
Farmington | UT | USA | Posted: 10:00 PM on 12.31.09
->> I commented on this before in this thread, but a lot of people must have missed it, we tested a Mark IV and spent most of our time shooting it at high ISO's and sports, the type of things that most newspapers actually shoot.

Here are some links to actual high ISO images shot by some of our staffers. They were shot at ISO 1600 to 12800 at a high school basketball game.
http://www.deseretnews.com/photo/gallery/hs/3251/High-school-basketball-Bin...


and at ISO 5000 - 12800 at a high school wrestling match:
http://www.deseretnews.com/photo/gallery/hs/3253/High-school-wrestling-View...

Bottom line, the autofocus is a major improvement over the Mark III and the high ISO in the camera we tested was amazing. But go check out the photos and look for yourself.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Primoz Jeroncic, Photographer
Kranj | SI | Slovenia | Posted: 4:40 PM on 01.01.10
->> I just got mine yesterday. Last day of previous year and first of new one are not really busy ones, so I didn't do much then play around a bit. So I can't say anything about af yet, but Sunday will be first real af test already with alpine skiing World cup race on my schedule, and Wednesday even worse one, with night skiing WC. So I guess I will have some more info about this shortly.
For now all I can say is, that high iso looks impressive (not that I would really need something like iso 12.800, but perfect iso3200 is cool thing). But more about this later on :)
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Brad Barr, Photographer
Port St. Lucie | FL | USA | Posted: 9:38 AM on 01.03.10
->> The question isnt is it better than the mk3.....the question needs to be is it better than the D3s...or even the 2yr old D3. If not then the exodus will continue at an even greater rate. I hope it is actually, cause many Nikon lenses are already hard to get from the last years wave of converts. I shot night soccer with my D700 at 12800....it was ok...but the D3s has put it to shame. The Mk4 NEEDS to be at least an improvement over the D3/D700..... or well...you know....
bb
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (1) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Matthew Sauk, Photographer
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 11:02 AM on 01.03.10
->> I don't believe it has to be better, it just has to work. Which from early reviews shows that it does.

The plus factor is that the HIGH ISO is outstanding as well.

The other factor, it has over 6mb of extra image size to play with unlike the 12mb from the Nikon. Another plus, it is 1.3 crop compared to a full frame Nikon.

Sure the Nikon can use the 1.2 crop but you also lose image size again.

As much as most say that more megapixels isn't important, to me it is nice that I can crop heavy and still get an image that is as large the Nikon.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Matthew Sauk, Photographer
Sandy | UT | United States | Posted: 11:05 AM on 01.03.10
->> not sure what I was smoking, but my apologies, it has 4mp more.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Al Diaz, Photographer
Miami | Fl | USA | Posted: 11:44 PM on 01.04.10
->> I love the Mark IV, It works!
I just shipped it back to Canon today.
I shot two state championship football games, general assignments and the Champs Bowl. The first thing I noticed is how sharp my images looked on the new LCD screen. In fact all my beat up Canon lenses look sharp again!
Using a 400/2.8 on bursts of 8 to 12 frames of running backs in a game all the images were sharp, except for a frame or two on occasion. Mind you that's me tracking the player weaving in and out behind other players. I could shoot the quarterback releasing the ball and getting the receiver catching it. Something I could never do with the Mark III. The shadow detail of a face seen inside a players helmet at ISO 12,800 is phenomenal and yes that was of an African American player at a high school football game with three other players in the frame. The coolest thing is how sharp the pictures looked at the peak of an action packed moment, something my Mark III's always have a tendency to pop out of focus on. I did not get a chance to shoot any video. I did not change any of the factory settings except for selecting the back focus button and using the center focus point. The .jpeg files looked awesome with minimal need for Photoshop.
 This post is:  Informative (1) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mike Janes, Photographer
Attica | NY | USA | Posted: 12:17 AM on 01.05.10
->> Al - got any samples out there to check out? Giving the IV a month or so on the market before grabbing one.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Anantachai Brown, Photographer
Jacksonville | FL | | Posted: 12:22 AM on 01.05.10
->> I WANT ONE....maybe two!!!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Primoz Jeroncic, Photographer
Kranj | SI | Slovenia | Posted: 6:26 AM on 01.05.10
->> Based on this what I did on Sunday (alpine skiing World Cup), af works really good. I would say it's actually a lot better then on mk2, while mk3 was joke anyway.
Only "problem" I have at the moment are picture styles, since 0 values, are obviously not same as 0 values on mk2. But that's nothing what can't be changed with a bit of time and testing.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

G.J. McCarthy, Photographer
Dallas | TX | Lower 48 | Posted: 8:26 AM on 01.05.10
->> "Gerry- I am glad you had good Mark IIn bodies. Mine sucked- BUT they were better than most of my Mark III bodies. I finally got one real decent Mark III from Canon this past summer that had white tape on the bottom of the camera- it was from their latest batch and worked better than the previous 8-10 I had tried."

Hey Brad -- sorry for not replying. Ya, you might be right and perhaps I got lucky. One thing that might have clouded my judgment was that the IIn's were a bit of a step up, on some level, from what I'd been using at my previous paper before I came to the DMN.

The problem I had with the IV was its tracking. It wasn't *nearly* as bad as the the III was, but looking over the three games I shot with it (one Mavs, one Stars and one Cows), I could still look through the sequences and see instances where the focus was locked on like the first one to two frames, the softened for no discernible reason as the subject moved towards or away from me, usually in pretty even (read: straight) lines.

But, again, the camera I briefly has was light years ahead of the III as far the focus goes. I've been pretty fortunate in that the III issued to me has behaved fairly well, but enough of my colleagues have been hosed that I know it's a problem piece of equipment.

So kudos to Canon for producing a pretty solid piece of gear. The files are lovely, and the high iso capability is, as the kids say, redonkulous. Seriously, I'm not sure what kind of spelunking spot news gig I'd be in to necessitate ISO 102,400, but I guess it's nice to know the option is there.

Cheers, and best of luck to all those making the big buy.

- gerry -
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Al Diaz, Photographer
Miami | Fl | USA | Posted: 9:51 AM on 01.05.10
->> Nothing special but here is a gallery of my shots from the Sate Championship. If a frame does not look sharp it's not from the Mark IV.

There is a mix of photos in this gallery from my 1D and the 1D Mark IV. Frame 14 was shot at ISO 12,800. I blew that frame up vertical on my screen from ball to helmet and the quality was great with minimal noise.
http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/photos/gallery/1391166.html

Most of the shots in the second gallery were shot with the Mark IV except the three frames of the player flipping over in the end zone and the first two frames in the gallery. They were shot with my old 1D.
http://www.miamiherald.com/sports/high-schools/belen-jesuit/story/1389324.h...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael L. Palmieri, Photographer
Barnegat | NJ | USA | Posted: 10:04 AM on 01.05.10
->> I trust that Rob Galbraith will soon have an extremely detailed breakdown of the Mark IV in the near future.

That said, I am really looking forward to seeing D3s and Mark IV files next to one another. I hope that there will be studio images of various subjects shot exactly the same with both bodies. Naturally that doesn't address focus and tracking comparisons, but it will show true apples-to-apples comparisons of noise, color, shadow and highlight detail and the like.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Josh Lehrer, Photographer, Assistant
Fairfield | NJ | USA | Posted: 10:06 PM on 01.05.10
->> Michael:

Just you wait! I have something exciting in the works involving the MkIV and D3s
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

David Harpe, Photographer
Louisville | KY | USA | Posted: 2:58 PM on 01.06.10
->> http://www.engadget.com/2010/01/06/canons-eos-1d-mark-iv-gets-unboxed-high-.../

Pics and info...
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Peter Buehner, Photographer
Orono | ME | USA | Posted: 3:51 PM on 01.06.10
->> Has anyone had the chance to compare IQ with the mark III at low ISO? Especially in print? I know this isn't necessarily the priority for SS'ers but I am feeling more and more confident re: the AF performance and ISO capabilities. If I get the mark IV it will have to be a do it all camera for me.

It has come down to keep the mark III and add a 5D mark II
or sell the mark III and have only the mark IV

anyone else in the same boat?

Peter
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Ken Shelton, Photographer
Wyckoff | NJ | USA | Posted: 7:47 PM on 01.06.10
->> Ask me Saturday. B&H shipped mine today.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Rick Osentoski, Photographer
Martin | OH | United States | Posted: 8:09 PM on 01.06.10
->> Peter, I got mine yesterday and did a few food shots with it today, the image quality is as good or better than the III or my II Ds.

http://ozdigital.blogspot.com/2010/01/canon-mark-iv-food-shot-review.html
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Peter Buehner, Photographer
Orono | ME | USA | Posted: 8:22 PM on 01.06.10
->> Thanks Rick. I checked your blog. They look good. I will check back for your impressions after the basketball.

take care,
Peter
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Josh Lehrer, Photographer, Assistant
Fairfield | NJ | USA | Posted: 10:03 PM on 01.06.10
->> Sneak preview...shot for shot against the 1D mark III, raw files with zero noise reduction...the mark IV doesn't really show much difference in noise until you get past 1600...at about 6400 there is almost a 1 stop difference. 12800 is completely usable. Stay tuned!
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Les Schofer, Assistant
Lynchburg | VA | USA | Posted: 11:04 PM on 01.06.10
->> A friend of mine just got one and I will shoot a women's basketball game with it on Saturday.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Andrew Nelles, Photographer
Chicago | IL | usa | Posted: 4:46 PM on 01.12.10
->> Got mine a few hours ago, so far so good. However I'm having one issue with my it, in my 1D3 I liked having the spot metering linked to the active AF point.

On my 1D4 I have C.Fn I - 7 set to 1:Enable (use active AF point)

which should make the active AF point the site of spot metering (as in the 1D3.) However it is still only spot metering on the center point when I'm focusing on a different point.

Any ideas on what I am doing wrong?
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Marc Estrada, Photographer
St. Petersburg | FL | USA | Posted: 5:00 PM on 01.12.10
->> Has anybody seen this yet? Mark IV and D3S comparisons, raw and Jpg.

http://www.moss-foto.com/nctest/cniso.htm
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael Troutman, Photographer
Carmel | CA | USA | Posted: 6:35 PM on 01.12.10
->> I downloaded a couple of the RAW files at 6400 for kicks to compare noise at 100%...and it's not even close.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Russ Isabella, Photographer
Salt Lake City | UT | USA | Posted: 7:49 PM on 01.12.10
->> Andrew: Saw this in a post on Fred Miranda:

"Solved.

if CF-III-10 is set to 0, the spot metering will still occur from the center regardless of the setting of CF-1-7."

Hope that helps.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Mike Huffstatler, Photographer, Assistant
Rancho Cucamonga | Ca | United States | Posted: 8:00 PM on 01.12.10
->> Michael, when you say "I downloaded a couple of the RAW files at 6400 for kicks to compare noise at 100%...and it's not even close." which is the winner in your opinion? I thought they both looked pretty good.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Michael Troutman, Photographer
Carmel | CA | USA | Posted: 9:46 PM on 01.12.10
->> They are both winners. It's amazing what cameras are capable of now.

That said, the D3S is totally in another class at high ISO based on what I see in this test (and the test has all sorts of control issues, which the tester acknowledges). I find these sorts of comparisons (wall clocks, dolls, etc) mostly laughable anyway. Real world use (and ultimately revenue generated from that use) is what matters. But it was mildly interesting to open up two of the files and view at 100%.

I think those that haven't switched to Nikon are going to be happy with this camera. There are so many compelling things about the Nikon system (glass, flash system, AF, full frame, ergonomics, quality, reliability, customer service, etc) that if you haven't switched by now you're unlikely to anyway. The Mark IV is available at last and is a clear "winner", so enjoy.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Joe Winn, Photographer
Tampa | Fl | USA | Posted: 10:51 PM on 01.12.10
->> "I think those that haven't switched to Nikon are going to be happy with this camera. There are so many compelling things about the Nikon system (glass, flash system, AF, full frame, ergonomics, quality, reliability, customer service, etc) that if you haven't switched by now you're unlikely to anyway. The Mark IV is available at last and is a clear "winner", so enjoy."

It's funny because these are all the compelling reasons I have stayed with Canon for so long ;)
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

Monty Rand, Photographer
Bangor | ME | USA | Posted: 12:37 AM on 01.13.10
->> I love mine. So far the images look great and the AF is awesome. The AF is very similar to my original 1D which I loved.
 This post is:  Informative (0) | Funny (0) | Huh? (0) | Off Topic (0) | Inappropriate (0) |   Definitions

This thread has reached the maximum number of posts
If you would like to continue it, please create a new thread.
[ Create new thread? ]



Return to --> Message Board Main Index
Putting Some Muscle Into Photography SecondFocus ::..