I have had the mark IV for about a month now. When I first tried it (borrowed from a friend) I wasn't so sure it was worth the upgrade over my mark III. I can now say with confidence that it is better at just about everything that i find crucial in my work. Better tracking in AI Servo (and I like my mark III), better high ISO by about a stop, better resolution, better reav LCD and focus check.
Also:
the orientation sensitive AF point has given me many more keepers in a game, it is a great addition.
Auto ISO is going to be great when I need it. I hated the fact that you can't dial in exposure comp with it on but someone in another forum gave me a workaround so it is good.
Here are some shots from the last week or so:
Thanks P Alesse,
The other thing I forgot to mention that is an improvement over the mark III is the AWB. Historically AWB is notoriously bad (at least with Canon). There is a bit of color cast in some of these shots (I didn't fix them in post) but they were all shot with AWB and look better than my 1D III or 40D. the venues I shoot have terrible mixed cycling lighting and it is a real hassle to fix in post so this is good enough for me. If one of them ends up being printed large, I supply a color corrected version to them.
cheers,
I am very happy with it. Initially I had decided to hold off on the upgrade but I figured I could sell it with minimal loss if I wasn't thrilled. People that aren't happy with the ISO performance need to remember that there was a 60% increase in MP compared to the mark III. Getting nearly a stop of high ISO performance along side that is very impressive. Sure I wish that it had the D3s ISO ability but I also like the resolution of this camera. Everything is a compromise.
John, good luck in the job search. Tough times for sure.
fernsidekid wrote:
Cool swimming shots!
Can you give us a guide what PP/noise reduction was used if any?
(eargerly awaiting Mark IV here in NZ)
I deal with pretty high volume but still only shoot RAW so my workflow is quite basic and crude unless it is for a large print assignment. Most of these are used by the University for web promotion and some small print in viewbooks etc.
I run virtually everything through noise ninja. There aren't any profiles out yet that I know of so I usually auto profile on a layer and then reduce the opacity if it is too strong. I then add a slight sharpening 50 and 1.0 in photoshop with smart sharpen.
If I resize it for the web I will do another sharpening pass but that is it.
-One other bonus to add re: the mark IV is the ability to go incrementally above ISO 3200. With the mark III the jump is to 6400 and that is very iffy with the mark III.
Thanks everyone for looking and the kind comments.
T.K. wrote:
Interesting... AWB is the one thing I have been thinking was not quite as good. Not huge but enough to make me question it.
this is my experience in my venues. I have heard others with different opinions. I am sure that there are some lighting situations that it doesn't handle as well.
