Canon EOS 1D Mark IV

about | support

Its so fast in acquiring focus that you can't imagine. It holds focus point in AlServo perfectly despite RG experiments. Image quality, colors, tonality are outstanding.
Coming from Canon 10D, Canon 1DMKII, Canon 1DMKIII.

Overall this product is exactly what it needed to be. Something that is great for shooting low light sports. It has great ISO handling and it focuses fast on the move.

ISO does not live up to "noise free" hype and expectations.

My much herald 1d Mk 4 arrived yesterday. Eagerly anticipated, I have to confess that I immediately compared its promising Hi-ISO capability to that of the Nikon D3s (purchased last week). I was immediately disappointed. Many steps up from it's predecessor (1D Mk3), the camera has greater resolution, AF revamping, new menus, etc. I wanted to see its ISO capabilities. What I initially noticed was that by 6400 noise was apparent, by 12,800 noise was dominant,in shadows and highlights...

Putting the camera through the paces testing single shot AF and AI-Servo, the camera held its own in a variety of outdoor settings. The camera has its own identity. Canon has re-created an excellent product. In my opinion, contending with Nikon's D3s, the 1D Mk 4 falls short in two very significant areas:
1. ISO range. Canon would've done better to state that the base ISO is really 100-6400. Unlike Nikon's D3s which is quite impressive above 6400-12,800. I think that the 1D Mk4 steps outside of the comfort zone beyond 6400. This leads me to believe that Canon was trying to seize its market share since Nikon announced their iteration only days before Canon theirs.

2. In-Camera controls and RAW file processing capabilities (Image Overlays, multiple exposures, et.al.) as well as the pixel size leave the 1D Mk4 Camera Raw at a very slight disadvantage. The larger pixel pitch allows for a significant amount of light gathering and a low noise to pixel ratio. Perhaps this is the reason that Nikon opted for a full frame over the higher resolution cropped sensor of the Canon.

For some, these differences may be insignificant. Nevertheless, Canon shines with its trademark "page-popping, 3-dimensional image quality." The files appear extremely natural, skin tones (particularly varied skin colors and tones) look very good. AF showed no signs of lag shot in RAW. One other thing about Canon vs Nikon: While Nikon has the ISO advantage and a few more in-camera features (tricks), Nikon's files look more "harsh" and less natural when photographing darker hues. Canon blows its competitor away when it comes to sheer natural color rendition.

Finally, this is a very nice upgrade. The camera boast several advantages among Canons own line. To cite a couple: this is a time tested pro-grade body with great resolution, making it tougher than the higher resolution full frame 5D Mk2. While the 1d Mk4 has a crop frame (1.3) sensor, it provides the great focal reach that sports, event and outdoor photographers prefer. Vis-a-vis the 1Ds Mk3, this camera boasts unrivaled speed, a newer processor and menu; to say nothing of a $1,000.00 price differential.

While I recommend it without reservation... don't pass up a chance to test a Nikon D3s.

Movie Mode button would be nice.

[marker]Tracking subjects:[/marker]

When tracking birds it seems to be holding its own when it comes to locking onto a subject and keeping it in some of the more contrasty conditions, where as the M3 would hunt and loose its pray when the subject was at a distance. I did a test of a 22 shot burst of a car driving at me at approximately 50mph in a little over a 2 second time frame almost every frame was in acceptable focus. The first time out with my M4 I had not took the time to adjust my 500mm using the lens alignment, I found that my 500mm with or without the 1.4 needed about +10 to push the focus back to the correct spot it needed to be. I believe my M3 was at +5.

[marker]Static shots:[/marker]

I'll start right out saying.. I know your not supposed to shoot static subjects using AiServo but I always have in the past with my M3. Using the M4 there is a slight difference when viewing the subject through the lens, you can see and hear the lens hunting slightly more then with the M3.. coincidentally, I believe the keeper rate was very high and was right up there and maybe better than the M3 after its latest fixes. Next time I'm going to use the lens button on the 500mm to switch to One shot mode. Smile

[marker]Movie mode:[/marker]

The video is a bit awkward to use, you have to set it up in the menu to use the LV, then activate using the "FEL" button. I took a few short movies inside the house and they looked very impressive.

[marker]Controls:[/marker]

The camera feels much like the M3 in many ways, very easy to adapt to the controls since they are virtually identical to the M3.

[marker]Processing of images:[/marker]

We've been using Digital Photo Professional to process our images from Raw, I noticed when using Lightroom or ACR the images would get a slight color shift in them showing bleed of magenta and cyan in the bokeh areas. DPP seems to either fix this problem or does a better job with the Raw files. I shot some JPEGs and they looked fine in this area so I'm guessing that LR or ACR is the culprit of this... I can post samples showing this if anyone is interested.

Its a learning experience getting used to 100% with a higher Megapixel camera, but the images seem to have a softer feel too them at 100%. I guess this is normal and my brother who has a 5D II said it was hard to get used to this when he started working with his 5D MarkII.

High ISO is amazing, even up to 6400 ISO when proper exposure it can be cleaned up with very little NW applied.

Hope this helps some of you.

Chad

Need to turn off "Automatic Lighting Optimiser" to see real image - annoying when shooting RAW.

Not cheap, but being an early adopter never is Smile

I have a 1D Mark III (and 1Ds Mark III). I never had trouble with the focus on the Mark III, but that's because I only use One Shot, not AI Servo. This camera is at least as fast and accurate as the Mark III.

The user interface is almost identical (except that the back screen is hugely improved), so I could start shooting immediately. However, it's critical to read the manual cover-to-cover - they have added so much functionality that there are a few tripwires. One of these tripped me: Auto Lighting Optimiser (ALO) makes bad exposures look good, which is bad when you are shooting fast (or sloppy - I admit it! I was shooting at the zoo to try the camera out...), because the RAW images won't look as good. I recommend turning ALO off except when you want to shoot JPEGs (and maybe even then).

Auto ISO is very effective - it's like getting program modes that will set the ISO as well as the aperture and shutter speed. Being a tad conservative, I'll probably shoot with a fixed ISO a lot of the time, but it's cool to have the option.

I bought this camera to get low-light/available light shooting options. I got a whole lot more than that. I may even play with video one day Smile

In Australian Dollars

The low light shooting is so good it is a pity you need to put on the flash to get the infrared focusing but then you can shoot in light so low!! I put a cover over the flash and tilt up and it selects iso 1600 other wise it sets iso 400.