5D MkII vs 1D MkIV

J

Jus10m

Active member
With the amazing (sounding) MkIV coming out soon and the MkII getting a 24p firmware update in the near future, which one is the better buy?

The MkIV's footage looks insanely amazing.
http://prolost.com/blog/2009/10/19/nocturne-and-the-canon-1d-mark-iv.html
What with it's "better then the human eye" ASA capabilities. Is that that worth the $5000 price tag? (Without a lens!)

And then you have the MkII with it's soon to be had 24p powers, full sized sensor and with a price tag of $3500 (with a lens).

Is the Mk IV's crazy ASA powers and almost no jello effect worth the extra cash????

What says you smart guys and gals?
 
hmmm... maybe they finally noticed the moire in a couple of the shots and asked for a re-edit :happy:
 
sbryan said:
Nooooooo

Canon took it down.
Click to expand...
Weird.

BradM said:
hmmm... maybe they finally noticed the moire in a couple of the shots and asked for a re-edit :happy:
Click to expand...
haha.
Well, if Canon did request the video be removed, their motives puzzle me.
I just think smugmug's servers became a little brittle after all the traffic. Was it removed from Vimeo too?
Maybe somebody took some time to actually read all those terms of service agreements and decided that if they wanted to keep their work, they'd best go somewhere else.
 
5D Pros:

Full Frame
Better Dinamic range (in theory)
More Megapixels (don't know if this influeces on the video)

5D cons:

Worse camera frame
No 25p/24p as of now- when is "first half of 2010" ?
Single Digic IV processor- worse rolling shutter
No 720p
LCD worse than 1d Mark IV (I'm not sure but have that impression- is this true?)


1D Mark IV Pros:

Dual Digic IV (better rolling shutter- see nocturne)
720p- Aliasing a problem, but another option. We still don't know if they improved on 720p moire or not.
Much better camera frame- Water "proof", much more durable.
Better low light- 6400 ISO and still no Noise!

Cons:

Worse dinamic range due to smaller sensor
Less megapixels
crop factor for full frame lenses- hard to find ultra wides.
Price almost 2x of 5D Mark II
 
the reason the 5d is so good in low light is essentially how big the sensor is, but noise isn't just from sensor size, heat and processing power is ur number one enemy. the better the cooling the less noise you have, the more processing power, the less noise you have. dual digic iv sensors give you a lot of juice, even if they are smaller, which they aren't by a lot it is cranking out double the power. the reason the iv (most likely in my humble opinion) is that the heating blocks on it are probably bigger and more efficient. 7d has had overheating issues, 5d gets pretty hot too from prolonged shooting, it gets more noise the hotter it gets. heat is ur enemy, and i think the 1d does it so well cause they probably got the heat dissipation really good along with a billion new algorithms to interpret a low light image. if you find a way to water cool a camera sensor you'll be seeing clean images a lot farther up then 6400 asa...
 
Why did the idiots @ Canon take down the video??

I wanted to show that video to some more people, the fact that this was shot at ISO's above 6400 is crazy
 
Ok, so that's pretty much what I suspected.
Basically, is it worth it to you to spend the extra cash to get a cleaner and higher ASA and have less jello effect. I say if you can afford it - hell yeah.

So then with that said, and this may come way out of left field, but how does the HPX500 stand up to what we know about the 1D Mk IV? I only ask this because I would be able to get an HPX500 at a very low price and was wondering if it's even worth it with these new DSLR cameras coming out.

Thanks for all your guys's help so far and everything in the future!
 
I've actually had a similar question -- is the HPX worth it with all these new DSLRs coming out? My production company is trying to figure out what exactly to invest in and while the DSLRs seem damn near amazing, the HPX feels... safer, somehow.

What does everyone think?
 
IMO, the HPX is definitely worth it for scenarios where speed of production and fast delivery is required. It is a better camera for regular TV production and event coverage.

Pluses of an HPX500:

Shoulder mount form factor- much more stable picture from the camera out of the box. Shoulder mount cameras are much better balanced than a VDSLR with a " handheld kit".

Recording times- Put 2 x 32GB or 4x (can't remember how many p2 slots the HPX has- 2 or 4) and you have continuous recording time for long events.

720p MUCH BETTER- If you need slow motion, the HPX is probably the best bang for the buck out there.

4:2:2 DVCPRO HD- yes, less resolution, but fantastic colors and dinamic range. Fully supported in all editing systems (excluding SONY vegas). Fast codec which is very edit friendly. Intraframe

Better dinamic range. According to Barry, the 7D has 7 1/3 of lattitude. I don't know about the 1D, but the HPX has, if I remember correctly, 8 to 8 and a half stops of lattitude.

Discovery "silver"- basically this is a seal of approval for producing shows for TV with this cam.

Excelent sound directly to the camera and professional input /outputs. 2x XLR inputs, genlock, HD-SDI

Excelent focus options- Focus in Red, Viewfinder (poor, but usable), LCD.

5 years warranty

Cons:

Heavy Beast- Pro Shoulder mount camera with pro shoulder mount camera issues: If you're still to buy support gear, which you really need, expect to pay much more for tripod, steadicam, jibs, etc.

Very, very expensive lens system- 2/3 lenses, from primes to zooms, are almost the price of a house mortgage.

Bad signal to noise ratio compared to a 1D

Pro Camera means permits, people shying away from it, and "look, its the evening news!"or "Hey what the H#$% are you shooting!?"

Low resolution chips- more than enough for HD broadcast, not good enough for cinema production.

2/3 CCD's DOF is not as shallow as APSC-H: Comparable to 16mm, but far away from the beautiful S35mm look.

Everything is an extra: base plate, cards, lens, etc.

1D Mark IV pros:

Stealth form factor-being "small" photo cameras, these VDSLR's are a documentary and guerrilla filmmaker dream come true.

16mp sensor- Should have better resolution in HD than the HPX- but Barry needs to confirm this.

s35 sized sensor- Fantastic DOF characteristics.

Unbeliavable low light- A true revolution for guerrila production. This is the main reason I'm buying this camera

Not heavy- Support gear much cheaper for it, which means dollies, tripod, steadicam, jibs for it are actually affordable for the Indie, which also means you can have for the price of a HPX500 with lens the budget to have all these together for amazing production value for your production

CF and SD canrd recording- unexpensive media vs P2 cards

Pro Level camera- compared to the 5D and 7D, this is Canon's premium professional camera, only surpassed on the camera line by the 1Ds. Water "proof" (maybe more rain proof), rugged, built to last the abuse of war scenarios, this is a camera that is ready for the field.

"Cheap" lens- by cheap I mean unexpensive compared to 2/3rds. Still lenses, while breathing much more than video designed 2/3rds have amazing glass quality and cost only a fraction of the price, which means a complete premium prime set for the system would equal the price of a cheap HD zoom for the 2/3rds system

Cons:

H264- Not intraframe, compressed codec. Good bit rate, but needs to be transcoded to a more efficient and editable one on import

Photo form factor not good for handheld- Extra support gear is needed- Zacuto and Cinevate systems are a must.

720p aliasing- Not out yet, and we still don't know how 720p looks except for a single shot by Vincent Laforet in Nocturne, but if the 7D is any indication, this could be a big problem

No EVF, only LCD monitoring- which means, in direct sunlight or in very bright areas, you'll need a Zacuto Zfinder or something similar for focusing. No focus assist like the focus in Red requires the user to practice focusing.

No XLR or other professionakl inputs- additional investment in an external recorder like the Zoom, and no HD-SDI for most professional grade LCD's.

Recording time limit- Don't know if the fact the camera has 2 slots, one for CF one for SD will allow longer continuous recording times.

No internal ND's- For on-location scenarios with quick changes of lighting conditions, this is a bit of a hassle.

Well, there are obviously much more factors, but these are the ones that come to my mind right now.











\
 
Last edited:
Wow, SPZ - that was more a more helpful answer then I was ever expecting to get. It's great to see it layed out like that. I think after reading all that, my money is on the 1D. The fact that all the accessories and lens's are so much cheaper for that type of camera and the ability to get a much more dramatic DOF due to the chip size pretty much sold me.

Thanks again everyone!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top