January 31, 2010 - 7:31 am Mike - Excellent review. Thank you. I am also a wedding photog and have used and own the 1D Mark II, Mark III, and now the Mark IV. My feelings have always been that Canon has placed emphsis on the brighter light focusing ability of their 1 series cameras in favor of their low light sensitivity. I guess the cameras were really meant for sports photogs with wedding photogs not a major consideration. I still feel that way with the introduction of the Mark IV. I used it last night at a wedding and since the videographer was using very low light and the room was dark it was taking my Mark IV seconds to focus. It ultimaetly did focus if I persisted but way to long. I resorted to zone focusing and small aperatures to compensate. Finally, I think that Canon attempted to rectify this in the Mark III. Giving priority to the low light focusing ability and in so doing surprised and disapointed the sport and birding photogs. They would never admit it of course, so they kept quiet and did all they could to rectify and survive the mistake. P.S. I love the 1 series cameras with all of their faults. Other than low light focusing they never fail me.

January 31, 2010 - 9:59 am Federico (nick MacTwin) - Great review, I agree with you in all point (spot af is the first that I notice). I can hope even in other sets for AF, as an example the ability to change the selected point on fly during focus, when point selection with 45 point expansion is set (now with this conf. you need to touch the af poi sel. before and than change). It will be nice to have af illumination on even on the full auto 45. Another little limitation is the ability to put iso range only on the "stop" and we can't put fraction like 8000 or 10000. Anyway Canon makes a stellar camera. PS In my opinion the ability to have high precision point 2.8 (very important if you have high resolution) creates a limit in the capacity to get low light focus very fast, but this is only a supposition. all the best Federico

January 31, 2010 - 10:40 am Tom - Hey Justin I always appreciate your reviews. Have you heard anything about the future 1DS mark lV?

January 31, 2010 - 10:52 am Al Wagner - Thanks for a great review on thenew MkIV I just put my name on the list and this review confirms that the camera will do what I'm expecting. Thanks

January 31, 2010 - 3:12 pm Kim Yausie - Justin! The article was outstanding! And even though you are so much more well versed in the technology than I am your issues where not over my head. I suffer with crappy low light autofocus and it's been driving me nuts! I'm going to keep trying different things; not going to give up. I don't shoot sports but I love my clients in action and it's been a real headache to not get the results I was hoping for. I really appreciate this article and look forward to any insight you may have in the future :) Still love my baby! 1DMarkIII! Kim

January 31, 2010 - 4:38 pm Whitney Taylor - Great review.. so in depth! The first picture of it is badass ahah. I really like the ISO charts. The markII images actually surprised me - I thought the markIV would be significantly better but it was quite comparable up to 6400. (link should work now)

January 31, 2010 - 5:05 pm genotypewriter - Thanks for the review! Much appreciated. I have 2 questions for you: 1. About the lowlight AF... When you said the 5D2 was better, did you mean that the 5D2's center was better than the 1D4's center? I understand that there are a lot of equal spec AF points on the 1d4 but center (because of its location) might work differently. (it was center, one-shot, no af expansion for both cameras. Updated review to reflect) 2. Which lenses did you use for each of these tests, especially the lowlight AF that you mentioned? (for the low light ones, the 35 f/1.4, 16-35 f/2.8 II, and the 135 F/2. Review updated to reflect) Thanks! GTW

January 31, 2010 - 7:46 pm Peter Edge - Justin, A really interesting and I feel balanced review. Thanks for your hard work on it. p.s I could not agree more about the dedicated spot autofocus button. Trying to nail the catchlight on a small birds black eye on a black background will be tough. Best regards Pete

January 31, 2010 - 7:57 pm mikeemee - Great review, thanks. I used my new Mark iv last night at a wedding. Very low lighting. My findings were the same. I felt it tiook longer to focus than my Mark III. I love all of the other improvements. Better screen. Higher iso capability, verticle focus point, sharper out of camera and more. All very important, but the focus lag in VERY low light is frustating and dissapointing. My answer will be to infared assist.

January 31, 2010 - 8:44 pm Janal - Great review and you definitly answered the questions I was most concerned with. Thanks Janal

January 31, 2010 - 9:01 pm Serge - I got my IV yesterday, and when I was ready to give it a try, it was already dark. Anyway, I was particularly interested in testing it with 85/1.2 - so that's what I started doing yesterday evening in our family room. It was quite dark actually: one floor lamp used and TV (while my wife was watching it). I took several hundred pictures with lens wide open (1.2 - 1.8). No special settings: all defaults. The camera performed flawlessly. Not even one picture OOF. No back/front focusing. In each and every attempt, single-shot AF was acquired immediately (central point, assist points - tried different combination; I did not try servo). I am actually very impressed by this performance - AF was locking reliably even when I tried objects in the most dark areas of the room (for example, paintings on walls - floor lamp light could not reach them and the room is about 500 sq feet). I can tell that 1D Mark III I had would not even lock on those objects. I cannot compare to 5D II or Nikon - I do not have them, and I do have not any experience in using them. But I am not sure what even to compare in this case - it just works fine (so far). Obviously, if relevant and significant statistics are accumulated, we'll see perhaps some differences. But for all practical purposes, it seems to me that low-level light single-shot AF with Mark IV is not going to be a problem at all. Serge

January 31, 2010 - 9:52 pm Jorge - I use a 5D2, 40D and lately the 1D4. Under same circumstances (bar scene, very low light mostly towards tables and different colors with long dark areas), same place, same light, my 1D4 outperform the other cameras. It is not even “good” but my rate of keepers is better with the 1D4. In my case, a straight comparison of subjects moving (walking fast in a dark environment) yielded the 1D4 the winning place. The 5D2 hunts and simply not work UNLESS I use the ST-E2. I have to try the 1D4 with the ST-E2 to see if it gets better. My personal conclusion is that cameras are not at fault but Canon’s quality control. Sadly today, I believe we cannot do a real comparison between Canon cameras. The quality is all over the place! You may have an excellent 5D2 and a normal 1D4 while perhaps my 5D2 is not excellent and my 1D4 is better than yours. My 1D4 was very sharp out of the box. I got Err 20 and decided to send it co Canon. They fix it and “calibrated” it. I could see a difference before/after sending it. My 5D4 has never been at Canon’s. I need to play more with all cameras and different lenses, but so far, I truly believe my 1D4 is better for low light than my 5D2. Again, I point it to quality control and the difference you can find across the same model bodies.

January 31, 2010 - 10:04 pm John - Very nice and informative review. Thanks for taking the time and effort. So far my 1D Mark IV is a much improved camera compared to the two never fixed copies of the 1D Mark III I had. I did not expect the camera to be the equal of my Nikon D3s in high ISO settings--so that wasn't a disappointment. FF at 12 (anemic file size) versus 1.3 crop at 16 there shouldn't be an expectation of equal high ISO performance. However I am a little surprised at the tough time the Mark IV has on focusing in dim light. A couple of times I just gave up and used manual focus to get something. It seemed to hunt and have a tough time locking with a wide variety of lenses (2.8 to 4). The Nikon D3s and even the D3x had no problems in these same lighting conditions.. The only time I have had problems with the Nikon in dim conditions were with the series I 70-200 2.8 VR which had a very similar problem hunting and then finally locking out of focus.. I don't know if my camera is a dud or not, but the 7D and usually the 5D Mark II have less of a problem focusing in the same conditions.. I don't think I want to get rid of the camera for another at this point because overall the results are good. I will just not use the camera in dimly lit conditions..

February 1, 2010 - 12:17 am James - Great review mate. Makes it more convincing to go to Nikon D3s. The latter has a much better S/N control and I need high ISO's for my photo work. I have an 1Ds and while it's 'ancient' by some, it's still an Eagle amongst the pigeons. But alas, this bird is for sale - would make a good back-up cam for a sports pro photog.

February 1, 2010 - 6:34 am Jay - Looking at comparisons from various sites shows the old D3 to be a better performer than the Canon 1D4, with regards to low light focusing and High ISO capability. Many were expecting more from Canon but Nikon is pulling away. Have Canon not got the R&D capabilities of Nikon? Many pro's who where hanging on for the mk4 must surely be getting ready to jump ship.

February 1, 2010 - 6:12 pm Sara Churchill - Fantastic review. Covered all the important questions anyone could have about the Canon 1DMK4 very well. I returned mine for a Nikon D3s and agree with the other individuals posting comments - the Nikon has a huge edge in low light focus, high iso, dynamic range, better grain structure, improved build quality, and better battery life. Nikon is pulling away at this price lvl and I wish I could have seen your excellent review before wasting time with the Canon MK4. Thanks again for all your efforts - the samples tell the whole story.

February 2, 2010 - 1:55 pm Bård Mannseth - Thanks for a very nice review :-) One comment though: I don't really buy the explanation for why the 1D Mk IV isn't a full frame. If they made it full frame, but kept the MP to 16, clearing the charge wouldn't be any more of a problem than it is today would it? Full frame doesn't have to be 22 MP. I guess the reason rather is that they wouldn't have it compeete with the upcoming 1Ds Mk IV with xx MP. I Guess many would prefer the 1D for the more expencive 1Ds if it outperformed it in the high ISO department?

February 2, 2010 - 5:38 pm Federico (nick MacTwin) - Any time someone take a review like a fight of some model or brand. It's impossible to compare a 12mpx ff to a 16 aps-h. Why no one think about the top camera d3x? Fantastic, with that camera you can do everything, it can produce image similar to the 1d4 (same pixel size) with crop mode, it can be used in FF, it can produce 5fps in ff and 7 in crop mode (not 10 but enough), maybe produce similar (i never seen this kind of compare) iso noise of 1d4. BUT 7600 euro on ebay? Nice!! And what about a 1d mark4 + 5d mark2? It's cheeper, it is more durable (double life of every components), it is more secure (if one is gone you can use the other one)...and You have two camera that make top video performance. Make your choise ;)

February 3, 2010 - 7:30 am planetMitch - Justin, great review - so good, that we highlighted it on planet5D!

February 4, 2010 - 9:00 pm Eric D. Brown - Great review...looks like a nice camera.

February 7, 2010 - 11:37 pm Josh - Hey Justin, Thanks for taking the time to write this comprehensive review on the 1D Mark IV. Interesting to note the advantage on the 5D Mark II's ability to use spot AF in low light situations. (please note that the 5D Mark II does not have the option to spot autofocus. rather its regular af sensors are smaller and simply appear to perform better in certain situations. The 7D is the only other camera to have spot af, and it actually allows full time use. A feature that the 1D Mark IV should include)

February 23, 2010 - 6:29 am Quang - Very informative. Stumbled on your site while looking for the release of the 1ds mark IV.

January 31, 2010 - 2:53 pm 1D Mark IV Otra prueba de la 1D Mark IV - Canonistas.com - [...] prueba de la 1D Mark IV Canon 1D Mark IV Full Review: January 2010 | JG Photography Blog Saludos __________________ Blog *1Ds Mark III*16-35 2.8 II*24-105 4 IS*70-200 4 IS*300 2.8 [...]

February 5, 2010 - 8:34 am Recensione Canon EOS 1D Mark IV - Doro Murabito - Novità sulla fotografia digitale, canon, fotografia, reflex, tutorial photoshop - [...] e professionale della Canon EOS 1D Mark IV e vi consiglio di guardarla. Il sito Americano JG Photography mette a confronto quattro fotocamere di casa Canon: la EOS 50D, EOS 5D Mark II, EOS 1Ds Mark III e [...]

February 8, 2010 - 11:23 pm Saskatoon Photographers: Kzyzyk winter portrait | JG Photography Blog - [...] each week, but as you’ve probably noticed I’ve been really busy with my new toy, the Canon 1D Mark IV! Not much time right now to post anything, but rest assured that I’ll be [...]

February 9, 2010 - 2:48 pm Karel Donk’s Blog » Blog Archive » Canon EOS 1D Mark IV Reviews & Thoughts - [...] another 1D4 review, the reviewer looks at the noise in files produced by the 1D4, and says that it almost looks [...]