CANON EOS 1D MARK IV REVIEW - Amateur Photographer

On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:38:16 +0100, Bruce wrote:

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:52:31 -0700 (PDT), Rich
wrote:
On Aug 10, 5:11*pm, Bruce wrote:
The reviewer seems to like it. *;-)

http://preview.tinyurl.com/3yto9db
or:http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...anon_EOS_1D_Ma...

The reviewer is silly. He contends you'd have to compare the Canon
and Nikon D3s to see if there was a difference, there "could" be a
point in favour of the Nikon in terms of high ISO noise control. Dear
Namby Pamby reviewer, the Nikon will wipe the floor with the Canon in
that respect.


It's the usual British understatement that you should expect from a
review in Amateur Photographer. I thought it was actually quite
damning. ;-)


But it is nice it appears Canon fixed their AF problems.


It is nice that Canon appears to have fixed its AF problems. I fear
it is *only the appearance* that has been fixed.

I don't see how any continuous AF system can be called "fixed" when it
wouldn't be able to be used with any longer lenses that don't have wide
enough apertures. And can't be used at all with most lenses when using a 2x
tele-converter for wildlife and sports photography, the very subjects when
it would be most needed. A fairly senseless system. Looks good in print
though, doesn't it. Mostly useless in the real world.

On 11/08/2010 10:32, Will T wrote:
On Wed, 11 Aug 2010 08:38:16 +0100, wrote:

On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:52:31 -0700 (PDT),
wrote:
On Aug 10, 5:11 pm, wrote:
The reviewer seems to like it. ;-)

http://preview.tinyurl.com/3yto9db
or:http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk...anon_EOS_1D_Ma...

The reviewer is silly. He contends you'd have to compare the Canon
and Nikon D3s to see if there was a difference, there "could" be a
point in favour of the Nikon in terms of high ISO noise control. Dear
Namby Pamby reviewer, the Nikon will wipe the floor with the Canon in
that respect.


It's the usual British understatement that you should expect from a
review in Amateur Photographer. I thought it was actually quite
damning. ;-)


But it is nice it appears Canon fixed their AF problems.


It is nice that Canon appears to have fixed its AF problems. I fear
it is *only the appearance* that has been fixed.

I don't see how any continuous AF system can be called "fixed" when it
wouldn't be able to be used with any longer lenses that don't have wide
enough apertures. And can't be used at all with most lenses when using a 2x
tele-converter for wildlife and sports photography, the very subjects when
it would be most needed. A fairly senseless system. Looks good in print
though, doesn't it. Mostly useless in the real world.

So, that would be exactly like contrast AF in wildlife and sports.
Except the 1D AFs at f/8, so you can use it with the fairly common 300mm
f/4 and a 2x TC (with the 1.3 crop factor: 300x2x1.3=780mm). And on less
expensive bodies you can still use the same lens with a 1.4x TC (672mm
equivalent lens, 1.6 crop factor). Or a 100-400mm f/5.6 lens (640mm
equivalent).

--
Bertrand