We are pretty sure that there is no 1D Mark III replacement due at PMA 2009; however, the anticipation is building for such a replacement as the 1D Mark III ages and lags behind Nikon in many people’s minds.
Another rumor from a so-called Canon exec surfaced recently on the DPR forums:
A colleague is the editor of a large media outlet who has just recently been ‘lunching’ with Canon Sales exec’s in relation to the purchase of the new to be released 1DMk4.
Considering the MkIII was released in Feb 07 this is probably no surprise based on Canon’s 18-24 month update cycle.
The Mk4 will bring in to line recent upgrades seen in the 5DMk2, such as 920k LCD, Movie mode & revised AF and higher ISO capabilities.
No release date was offered.
There are a couple of problems with this info. First, Canon’s update cycle for pro-level bodies is 3 years, not 18-24 months. Second, the 5D Mark II has no revised AF – it’s the same as the 5D, only one cross-type sensor. If the 1D Mark IV had the “revised AF” of the 5D Mark II, it would be worthless as a sports photographer’s tool.
A little further down in the forum thread, a couple of forum posters speculate about the use of a 16 megapixel full frame sensor in the 1D Mark IV, while still maintaining 10 fps. I think this would be a solid setup; however, I’m curious to hear how sports shooters feel about the loss of the 1.3x crop on their long lenses?
More Canon 1D Mark IV Rumors.
The sentence….
“The Mk4 will bring in to line recent upgrades seen in the 5DMk2, such as 920k LCD, Movie mode & revised AF and higher ISO capabilities.”
…makes sense if the upgrades (autofocus, LCD, HD Movie, and higher ISO) are not literally from the 5DII but are instead comparable upgrades from the current 1DIII. Add a period following “5DMk2” and the new 1D Mark IV would address the bullet list of deficits/complaints about the 1DIII.
There is no “loss of the 1.3x crop” with a full frame sensor. The Photographer or photo editor can easily crop the resulting full-frame image, and you get the same shot as you would have had with a smaller sensor, with the same smaller file size you get when shooting with the smaller sensor. The only downside is that you fill up the memory card a bit faster but memory cards are getting bigger at a much faster pace than sensors so this isn’t really a problem.
As I understand it, the primary reason for the smaller sensor was so the camera could write the data to the buffer faster, which allows for a faster fps frame rate. It’s an obvious improvement to keep a fast frame rate and move to a full-size sensor. Canon could also offer an in-camera crop – with a crop mark in the mirror or a crop overlay on the eyepiece when the photographer sets the camera to use less of the sensor for the 1.3 crop-factor size. Then just read the central zone of the sensor to the file, discarding data outside the “cropped” dimensions.
@JC – Good point. Thanks for chiming in.
The main reason for using a 1.3 crop sensor was that is the largest size that can be made with a ‘single pass’ . Full frame needs a ‘duoble pass’ and is bloody expensive. Sony have developed a way to makea full frame using single pass technology and is employed in their cameras and nikons.
1.3 crop is the dumbest thing ever. there are NO wide angle lens that can be used with is. the EFS 10-22 can only be used on 1.6 crops and the 16-35 is only 20.8mm. This is the reason why I wont buy one otherwise id have one right now. So canon have no wide angle capable camera between the 50d and 1ds. Forget the 5d because its slow as hell. Hmmm why dont I just change to a Nikon D3, full frame, fast fps, 12MP. If the 1d4/ 1d IIIN is not full frame IM CHANGING TO NIKON!!
Canon segment their target markets WAY too much. You can have full frame but useless fps. You can have fast fps but no full frame and no wide angle. Canon force you to buy 1 bloddy camera for each little think you wanna do. The D# is starting to sound like the perfect jack of all trades and master of them all too camera!
Hi All
Mark IV should not have movie mode….keep it with the 5 line of cameras…I don’t thing many pros would want this in a Mark camera. I for one don’t want it…
Walt
Too true.
Why would any “photographer” want a video camera wasting space in their camera???
That is why there are cameramen…