Canon EOS5DMkIV

[basketballfreak6]

for those that may be interested...

exposed for highlights and pushed 3 stops in post, held up extremely well

5DIV Sensor DR Test by Tony, on Flickr

5DIV Sensor DR Test by Tony, on Flickr

url=https://flic.kr/p/LYCELZ][/url]5DIV Sensor DR Test 2 by Tony, on Flickr

5DIV Sensor DR Test 2 by Tony, on Flickr

part 2 much more demanding ~4.5 stop push in the shadows, granted very tricky and busy foreground but file does start to fall apart a bit here, i am sure it would hold up better in less demanding foreground

[Mark L]

ran raw file through DPP and exported as TIFF then edited in LR5

Is the reason you go via DPP simply to convert to TIFF or do you do a couple of basic things there on your way to TIFF??

[basketballfreak6]

Is the reason you go via DPP simply to convert to TIFF or do you do a couple of basic things there on your way to TIFF??

purely to convert to TIFF, i made sure everything is on zero tho before making the conversion in DPP

if only adobe would get their act together

- - - Updated - - -

Scarlett Honeyeater by Tony, on Flickr

ISO 12800, shot with sigma 150-600S at 600mm wide open handheld

[Hamster]

purely to convert to TIFF, i made sure everything is on zero tho before making the conversion in DPP

if only adobe would get their act together

Clearly I'm missing something. What is it that LR won't do that means you have to go to DPP first?

[basketballfreak6]

Clearly I'm missing something. What is it that LR won't do that means you have to go to DPP first?

adobe are asses when it comes to updating their raw support, currently no way of opening up 5DIV's raw file via adobe programs (even the dng converter not reading the raw)

been very frustrating editing 5DIV files atm

[MissionMan]

adobe are asses when it comes to updating their raw support, currently no way of opening up 5DIV's raw file via adobe programs (even the dng converter not reading the raw)

been very frustrating editing 5DIV files atm

There are a couple of things I find confusing with both Canon and Nikon when it comes to third party support. Obviously RAW files are a different issues, but the native support for RAW files seems to be better in the manufacturers products which makes me think that part of the problem is Canon and Nikon, although I'm sure Adobe has some part in it. The reason I say this is that I would never expect third parties with non-competitive products to have to reverse engineer some of the components.

The reality is Lightroom doesn't really compete with Nikon or Canon's offering, and yet the manufacturers seem hesitant to part ways with some of the IP that would make the photos out of their camera better. As another example, Profoto had to reverse engineer the TTL for Canon and Nikon, as they will for other systems like Fuji or Sony. The same with other manufacturers. Why? Anyone who buys a profoto B1 is clearly beyond the realms of a speedlight which is not strong enough to do things like overpower sunlight, and you would expect it to be an advantage for their users if they can use more professional tools.

[Hamster]

adobe are asses when it comes to updating their raw support, currently no way of opening up 5DIV's raw file via adobe programs (even the dng converter not reading the raw)

been very frustrating editing 5DIV files atm

Ah, yes, of course. I forgot there's a bit of a wait for the RAW support. Like MM says, it's a bit odd that Canon don't work with Adobe and hand over the info required on the launch of their new camera. Having said that, maybe Adobe think they can do a better job of converting RAW files and want to do it themselves. Capture one Pro is supposed (at least by the highly regarded pros I've talked to) to be a better RAW converter than LR (or the manufacturers software) and may think similarly. The downside is the wait...

[MissionMan]

Ah, yes, of course. I forgot there's a bit of a wait for the RAW support. Like MM says, it's a bit odd that Canon don't work with Adobe and hand over the info required on the launch of their new camera. Having said that, maybe Adobe think they can do a better job of converting RAW files and want to do it themselves. Capture one Pro is supposed (at least by the highly regarded pros I've talked to) to be a better RAW converter than LR (or the manufacturers software) and may think similarly. The downside is the wait...

I've started playing with Capture One and I'm pretty impressed. I think it'll be a big learning curve coming from lightroom, but overall I have found it to be good.

There are small features in the software I like, the ability to create presets for white balances off someone's skin for example. I.e. I can use a grey card in a photo to create a preset for my daughters forehead, then use her forehead as a white balance for future photos of her. Obviously it's not exact because skin tone can vary, but it's close enough to allow for fairly accurate white balances if you have photos of a person in varying conditions.

[basketballfreak6]

Ah, yes, of course. I forgot there's a bit of a wait for the RAW support. Like MM says, it's a bit odd that Canon don't work with Adobe and hand over the info required on the launch of their new camera. Having said that, maybe Adobe think they can do a better job of converting RAW files and want to do it themselves. Capture one Pro is supposed (at least by the highly regarded pros I've talked to) to be a better RAW converter than LR (or the manufacturers software) and may think similarly. The downside is the wait...

i think Canon's pretty stingy with their propriety stuff, much like their AF system for example (which is fair enough), guessing adobe has to reverse engineer or develop their own raw interpretation software themselves, still for a company this magnitude as well what many considers it the industry standard, it's pretty disgraceful for such slow support for a launch as big as the 5DIV, while on the topic of bashing adobe i also hate how they purposely stop updating adobe raw on older versions of their software as a method to force you to upgrade

- - - Updated - - -

I've started playing with Capture One and I'm pretty impressed. I think it'll be a big learning curve coming from lightroom, but overall I have found it to be good.

There are small features in the software I like, the ability to create presets for white balances off someone's skin for example. I.e. I can use a grey card in a photo to create a preset for my daughters forehead, then use her forehead as a white balance for future photos of her. Obviously it's not exact because skin tone can vary, but it's close enough to allow for fairly accurate white balances if you have photos of a person in varying conditions.

capture one is something i keep hearing about and wanting to try, but at this stage i dunno if i want to start from scratch with regards to editing...haven't even bothered to master photoshop yet...lol

i have to say i absolutely love lightroom tho, powerful (enough) yet simple to use, 98% of all my edits are done there

[MissionMan]

You can use capture one instead of Lightroom in combination with photoshop. It's more of a Lightroom competitor but has the advantage of layers.

The basics in capture one are fairly simple. It's the advanced stuff like Lightroom that takes time but they have created heaps of instructional which help


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ameerat42]

...haven't even bothered to master photoshop yet...lol...

So you're seeking to master Photoshop. A modest aim, so to speak... Most of us just "use" it (as best we can).

[basketballfreak6]

So you're seeking to master Photoshop. A modest aim, so to speak... Most of us just "use" it (as best we can).

LOL can you believe i only did my first ever composite in PS like a month ago?! after like 6 years doing this hobby? hahaha

[Hamster]

I bought and started using Capture One and pretty much had things under control after a few weeks of irregular use. All the same features as LR are there so there's a certain familiarity from the start. But you can customise shortcuts to be the same as LR for things that you regularly use such as G for grid/library view, R for resize etc. and really make it familiar/similar to LR.
The colour control is better and the ability to use layers/local adjustments is very good, as is the sharpening. If I was starting from scratch or not using photoshop much then I'd say C1 is the go. For me, I do my layer work in PS so the need to use the feature in C1 isn't there. Plus I have lot of processed images in LR and I didn't want to have the need to swap between the two for new and legacy images. It was just too open to stuff ups like forgetting to synchronise a folder, thinking it was empty and deleting it even though it contained images. C1 does seem to do a better job of the raw conversion.
Integration with other programs isn't as good as LR.
I can see me using it for the raw conversion where it's really important that this is as good as it can be, before transferring through to photoshop. e.g. a large print or a competition entry. I wish all my images were done in C1 but the years of LR use and the fact that I do serious layer work in Photoshop mean it's not as big an improvement as it needs to be for me to use it all the time.
Incidentally, converting my LR catalogue to a C1 catalogue worked fine, with no glitches.

- - - Updated - - -

capture one is something i keep hearing about and wanting to try, but at this stage i dunno if i want to start from scratch with regards to editing...haven't even bothered to master photoshop yet...lol

i have to say i absolutely love lightroom tho, powerful (enough) yet simple to use, 98% of all my edits are done there

You sound like a good candidate for a switch to Capture one. The extra editing functionality over LR would mean you could avoid going to PS for longer

[basketballfreak6]

I bought and started using Capture One and pretty much had things under control after a few weeks of irregular use. All the same features as LR are there so there's a certain familiarity from the start. But you can customise shortcuts to be the same as LR for things that you regularly use such as G for grid/library view, R for resize etc. and really make it familiar/similar to LR.
The colour control is better and the ability to use layers/local adjustments is very good, as is the sharpening. If I was starting from scratch or not using photoshop much then I'd say C1 is the go. For me, I do my layer work in PS so the need to use the feature in C1 isn't there. Plus I have lot of processed images in LR and I didn't want to have the need to swap between the two for new and legacy images. It was just too open to stuff ups like forgetting to synchronise a folder, thinking it was empty and deleting it even though it contained images. C1 does seem to do a better job of the raw conversion.
Integration with other programs isn't as good as LR.
I can see me using it for the raw conversion where it's really important that this is as good as it can be, before transferring through to photoshop. e.g. a large print or a competition entry. I wish all my images were done in C1 but the years of LR use and the fact that I do serious layer work in Photoshop mean it's not as big an improvement as it needs to be for me to use it all the time.
Incidentally, converting my LR catalogue to a C1 catalogue worked fine, with no glitches.

- - - Updated - - -




You sound like a good candidate for a switch to Capture one. The extra editing functionality over LR would mean you could avoid going to PS for longer

might have to download a trial and give it a crack sometimes

[Babu]

Have you seen promos for the W-E1 SD slot Wi-Fi adapter Canon has announced for the 7D II, 5Ds & 5DsR ? B&H are taking pre-orders at US$39.95 but haven't given a shipping date yet.

I'm glad you're happy with the 5D IV. (From the images you've posted, it seems to be working well). It's getting good reviews and, ordinarily, I would have bought one. However, I have the 5DsR for high res shots and I wanted a body which can deliver faster burst rates than 7 fps and works well at lower light levels. The 1DX II ( $8599 at CameraPro) is substantially less than double the launch price of the 5D IV ($4988 without a grip) but you are right - it is aimed at a different user group.

[Warbler]

Going through the same pain as you are BBFreak. Picked up a 5D Mk IV this morning. Not all that keen on having to convert my images to TIFF before then processing them through PS. Let me know when they update CC to include the Mk IV in their RAW converter. I'll have to go to CC from CS6. It was probably about time I did anyway. Spent all day trying to set up the Wi-Fi to auto upload to a WD My Cloud hard drive. No luck yet, but flattened two batteries doing it.

[Physioz]

for those that may be interested...

exposed for highlights and pushed 3 stops in post, held up extremely well

Very nice, Tony. Please keep going, I need to amass more evidence like this for my boss (wife)

- - - Updated - - -

Nice bird/photo; Tony, is that ISO 12800 without any noise reduction?

[Fettator]

Teds have them for $5000

GB

[basketballfreak6]

Going through the same pain as you are BBFreak. Picked up a 5D Mk IV this morning. Not all that keen on having to convert my images to TIFF before then processing them through PS. Let me know when they update CC to include the Mk IV in their RAW converter. I'll have to go to CC from CS6. It was probably about time I did anyway. Spent all day trying to set up the Wi-Fi to auto upload to a WD My Cloud hard drive. No luck yet, but flattened two batteries doing it.

how are you finding the performance of the camera so far?

- - - Updated - - -

Very nice, Tony. Please keep going, I need to amass more evidence like this for my boss (wife)

- - - Updated - - -

Nice bird/photo; Tony, is that ISO 12800 without any noise reduction?

lol i'll try when i get more time

the bird pic has had noise reduction applied already

[Warbler]

how are you finding the performance of the camera so far?

I've hardly used it at the moment. Been concentrating on setting the comms up as I'll be using it on a job next week where the images I take will go straight to a server in real time for the clients to view as I shoot. There's a bit of pressure right there...LOL.

I have noticed though that it has the same issues with recording to two cards simultaneously as the Mk III did. It's just not fast enough in the SD slot. I have no empirical data on it though. It may be marginally quicker, but at the price, UHS-II, or two CF slots would have been the go I think. Did you notice that Canon flipped the positioning of the USB and HDMI slots on the side of the camera? The little plastic fitting only allows the cables to fit in the correct slot. It means that the fittings are not interchangeable between the two models ie the 7D Mk II fitting won't fit the 5D Mk IV model. Gawd, it's like Sony all over again. You couldn't use the same battery in different cameras when I had a Sony, nor use the same charger.

I'll be giving it a bit of a shake-down tomorrow at the MX Race Day, so I'll know for sure how it performs for the use it is likely to get from me by then.

- - - Updated - - -

I meant to ask, have you tried the dual-pixel adjustment yet in DPP Ver 4? I had a quick look at it and couldn't figure out how to get it to work. I'll need to do some more reading. In the meantime, I'm getting 60MB RAW files with it switched on. That's only 600 images to a 32GB card, according to the camera's LCD display. The modest 7fps might be a good thing....lol.