EOS 5D Mark IV Introduced

[Waddizzle]

My favorite, NYC based, online Canon retailer is holding an event today, introducing the 30MB 5D mark IV.  The specifications for the camera are online, and the camera is available for pre-order.  It is priced comparable to the 5Ds cameras.  It looks like a winner.

[TTMartin]

---

@Davoud wrote:

Sharpness?

---

Canon's consumer grade STM lenses are all as sharp or sharper, including the EF 24-105 IS STM which sells for a fraction of the price. 

[RobertTheFat]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

---

@Davoud wrote:

Sharpness?

---

Canon's consumer grade STM lenses are all as sharp or sharper, including the EF 24-105 IS STM which sells for a fraction of the price. 

---

And at f/3.5-5.6. is not a constant=aperture lens.

[TTMartin]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

@TTMartin wrote:

---

@Davoud wrote:

Sharpness?

---

Canon's consumer grade STM lenses are all as sharp or sharper, including the EF 24-105 IS STM which sells for a fraction of the price. 

---

And at f/3.5-5.6. is not a constant=aperture lens.

---

Even when the stopped down to match the aperture the EF 24-105 f/4L IS still doesn't outperform the STM lens. 

[Waddizzle]

"Even when the stopped down to match the aperture the EF 24-105 f/4L IS still doesn't outperform the STM lens."

If you are happy with the EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM, that's great.  Doesn't that lens twist and turn when it focuses?  I prefer internal focusing.

[ebiggs1]

Davoud,

" "...desparate need of updating?" "

That statement is a little over the top.  Isn't it?  Some people are caught up on IQ, sharpness, if you will.  They think the Sun rises on IQ.  But in truth that is only one spec or aspect of a lens.  There are many other ways the ef 24-105mil beats all the consumer lenses.

" I never knew there was anything wrong with this lens."  I agree.  I never knew there was anything wrong with it either.  And, neither did a large percentage of my clients over the years.

If two lenses with essentially the same IQ but one with a constant aperture one not, I would prefer the constant aperture every time.

"I can't find anything wrong with the photos."  You bet.  Trust in what you see and not what some keyboard jock is trying to push.

[TTMartin]

The EF 24-105 f/4L IS is a dated L lens, that just doesn't compare to newer IS II lenses.

There were plenty that said the EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS was a great lens or at least that that it checked all the boxes mentioned by the poster above. But, how does it compare to the EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS II?

Anytime 3rd party lenses start to out perform Canon's L lenses, it's time for Canon do update them.

[Davoud]

---

@TTMartin wrote:

The EF 24-105 f/4L IS is a dated L lens, that just doesn't compare to newer IS II lenses.

There were plenty that said the EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS was a great lens or at least that that it checked all the boxes mentioned by the poster above. But, how does it compare to the EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS II?

Anytime 3rd party lenses start to out perform Canon's L lenses, it's time for Canon do update them.

---

I'm sure you're right. But I don't buy a new car every year, either (2006 Prius, 2006 Avalon, 2016 Lexus). Nor a new iPhone, Mac, TV, refrigerator or any other durable good because of some incremental improvement that I might or might not notice. I replace durable goods when they wear out or become broken and repairing them would be uneconomical.

As for comparisons, someone's opinion of the EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS vs. the EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS II is utterly meaningless to me; I rate a product by how well it satisfies my needs.

Fast lenses, high ISO? I know nothing of these things. I control the light, I don't let it control me. I have three Canon speedlites with radio triggering and two Profoto B1 500Air TTL's, also with radio triggering, so I can throw ample light on any subjec, at home or in the fieldt. I also employ diffusers and reflectors. I generally shoot at ISO 100 and between F8 and F16 except when I want to limit depth-of-field.

BUT I have a 5D Mark IV on order to replace my MK III because I hope that the touch focus, built-in WiFi, and GPS versatility (turns off with the camera) will improve my workflow. I have been using a CamRanger quite a bit for nature photography. It works well, but if I can eliminate that extra piece of gear I will be happy. 

[ebiggs1]

Davoud,

"I rate a product by how well it satisfies my needs."   You would be smart to continue that trend.

Anytime 3rd party lenses start to out perform Canon's L lenses, it's time for Canon do update them.

And to think sharpness is THE only thing is silly.  I agree sometimes Sigma or Tamron come out with some pretty sharp glass but that doesn't make them comparable to a Canon 'L' lens.

[TTMartin]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

Anytime 3rd party lenses start to out perform Canon's L lenses, it's time for Canon do update them.

And to think sharpness is THE only thing is silly.  I agree sometimes Sigma or Tamron come out with some pretty sharp glass but that doesn't make them comparable to a Canon 'L' lens.

---

I wrote outperforms, it is your reply that mentions sharpness.

Why do you automatically assume that sharpness is the only thing that outperform refers to? 

Why in many other threads do you keep praising and recommending the Sigma 150-600 OS Sport if you don't feel Sigma makes any lenses that are comparable to Canon 'L' lenses?

[diverhank]

---

@RobertTheFat wrote:

---

The 5D4 was more or less expected – some might even say overdue. But it's accompanied by several lens upgrades, and I'm not sure any of us saw that coming.

Hmmm... I guess it's just two new lenses. In the email I thought it looked like more. Anyway, the two are upgrades of already very popular lenses.

BTW, I can't help noticing that the 5D4/24-105 II kit isn't much of a bargain. It costs $1 more than buying the camera and the lens separately!

---

None of these was a surprise for me...the rumours had been out for several months regarding the Mark IV and the 24-105II and the 16-35 III and they were dead accurate.

People complained about the previous version of the two lenses that got upgraded.  I had both of them and thought they weren't too bad at all.  I don't see an overwhelming need to upgrade.

Interesting observation on the kit price...I guess we won't be seeing heavily discounted 24-105 II lenses anytime soon like we enjoyed with the 24-105 version I.

Regarding the 5D Mark IV, even though it's not obvious reading the specs, based on the 80D and 1DX II test results, the 5D Mark IV sensor will be a huge improvement over the 5D Mark III in terms of dynamic range - the ability to push the shadows (3 or 4 stops better).  Also the ability to focus at f/8 using all points should significantly improve AF for those of us using teleconverters.

The 8MB resolution increase, GPS, Wifi, touchscreen, 4K video etc. are icing on the cake...I think it's a worthy upgrade from the 5D Mark III...Not sure I'm excited about the $3500 price tag, though...