[D1N0]

Canon DR is slowly improving into the 13ev range. This camera has a new sensor. We will likely see some further improvement.
Canon EOS 80D vs Canon EOS-1D X Mark II vs Canon EOS 5DS

[Tas]

Thanks Clackers...... I'm guessing $3899.... about $1200 more then K-1 in Australia.

Not even close. I just got an email from Camerapro here in Brisbane. I can preorder one for AU$4999. That's more than $2000 over what my K-1 cost.

Now, with all the fuss about Pentax AF-C, maybe Canon have worked out the answer: Dual Pixel RAW file format (shoot now focus later!)

Anyhoo, some details and video here if you're interested.

Canon Announce 5D Mark IV!

Tas

[noelpolar]

I can preorder one for AU$4999.

Wow... unbelievable... I've been retired too long!

Good to see Canon not gouging their customers.....

---------- Post added 25-08-16 at 02:29 PM ----------

this Canon camera provide more to the table than anything else in the past 5 years.

Not even close..... the K-1 brought over 50% more image area to a million or more lenses!

[Nicolas06]

Wow... unbelievable... I've been retired too long!

Good to see Canon not gouging their customers.....

---------- Post added 25-08-16 at 02:29 PM ----------



Not even close..... the K-1 brought over 50% more image area to a million or more lenses!

This is something I alway found strange. So Nikon has 100 000 000 lenses. Pentax only 1000 000 (100 time less).

But then, if we count even that there 7000 K1 produced a month for 1 years and that every K1 owner will have only 2 lenses, this mean alredy 160K lenses. I can't immagine only 1000000 lenses in K-mount.

[monochrome]

This is something I alway found strange. So Nikon has 100 000 000 lenses. Pentax only 1000 000 (100 time less).

But then, if we count even that there 7000 K1 produced a month for 1 years and that every K1 owner will have only 2 lenses, this mean alredy 160K lenses. I can't immagine only 1000000 lenses in K-mount.

i thought we were up to 25,000,000 now. If it's a million I have a significant figure of them.

[surfar]

The biggest reason to go with Canon is for Canon's lens line up

Yes, the lens line up is pretty vast and the $$$$ ones have a good reputation.However ,with the adapters available now, theres options and alternatives to a Canon body.M4/3 ,Sonys can take the Canon glass too.

[Nicolas06]

i thought we were up to 25,000,000 now. If it's a million I have a significant figure of them.

Ok, sound more reasonnable

[Nicolas06]

Yes, the lens line up is pretty vast and the $$$$ ones have a good reputation.However ,with the adapters available now, theres options and alternatives to a Canon body.M4/3 ,Sonys can take the Canon glass too.

In MF... There no point to use a compromized AF design with different focus group, bigger/heavier if in the end you want to use MF... Just compare the size of a M135 f/2.5 with modern 135mm...

AF is not just a gimmick for most and if would only really apply to FF mirrorless to me. And if you get a smaller format, you give up in quality. Not sure getting a Canon 70-200 for around $2000 on a OMD10 is the best idea one could have...

[surfar]

Did I say EVERY lens was suitable?....its up to the owner, AND I use FF lenses on my Q system without any problems


Canon makes pancakes too!


Maybe you should go over to the M43 forums and tell all those guys that are doing it that they are WRONG!


Surprisingly, the images I see from M43 look pretty good....and when I take my one for a shoot I come home happy!

[Nicolas06]

Did I say EVERY lens was suitable?....its up to the owner, AND I use FF lenses on my Q system without any problems


Canon makes pancakes too!


Maybe you should go over to the M43 forums and tell all those guys that are doing it that they are WRONG!


Surprisingly, the images I see from M43 look pretty good....and when I take my one for a shoot I come home happy!

But then this completely invalidate your argument. This is possible, sure. But no FF and a big part of the fantastic Canon line are not pancake lenses.

If I am to pick one echosystem between Canon and m4/3 for witch one is the most complete and offer the most possibilities for high quality, I pick up Canon, that 100% sure.

The m4/3 key benefit is the size. That quite key argument to me, and m4/3 may very well be good enough in many case but that's another topic.

[surfar]

Ofcourse, and beauty is in the eye of the beholder!

[noelpolar]

This is something I alway found strange. So Nikon has 100 000 000 lenses. Pentax only 1000 000 (100 time less).

But then, if we count even that there 7000 K1 produced a month for 1 years and that every K1 owner will have only 2 lenses, this mean alredy 160K lenses. I can't immagine only 1000000 lenses in K-mount.

Learn to go with the gist of things and not be so .... whatever!

Anyway..... I used the term "or more" as by my count only 1mill have been tried on a K-1 so far!

[Nicolas06]

Learn to go with the gist of things and not be so .... whatever!

Anyway..... I used the term "or more" as by my count only 1mill have been tried on a K-1 so far!

Was not a criticism of your number, but more because I seen it often and it sounded small to me Sorry if you felt attacked.

[Adam]

Looks like it was just officially announced. Not cheap, but well-specced for a high-resolution FF. Will be interesting to see the IQ from this new sensor.

[D1N0]

Conservative Canon. They do have a touch screen though. 7fps for 30mp is good, The 1Dx mk II AF system will make it a very decent sports camera. (even though dpreview doesn't like it because it is too hard for them to try to learn it).