Performance Canon EOS 1D MarkIV

Performance

What can we say, but that the EOS 1D Mark IV is a blazing performer, and largely an excellent performing camera in both the field and in the studio. Of course it all starts with excellent handling characteristics…as I discussed previously the Mark IV is a well laid out camera, that puts the necessary controls comfortably at the fingertips. Lift the camera to eye level, and the view is both bright and clear through the viewfinder, which as you’d expect provides full 100% coverage of your composition. Turn the camera on, and firing times are instantaneous, with no perceptible shutter delay. And yes the camera is fast, and in general when a camera is referred to as fast they’re talking about frames per second. In the Mark IV’s case we’re talking about 14-bit, 16.1 megapixel files pumping at 10 frames per second, which is exactly what we achieved with our PhotoFast GMonster 533x CF cards. In RAW that’s good for 30 odd frames, followed by a frame rate less than half that following the filled buffer. On the JPEG front, this 10 fps can go on, and on, and on (hundreds of frames), given higher end CF cards. So yes, the camera is fast, perhaps too fast for many applications, where the camera is more wisely used with continuous shooting turned off.

Now to the much asked about AF system. From a “One Shot” perspective, the Mark IV works very well. The Mark IV offers 45 AF points, 39 of them cross type — IF you’re using a lens that’s f/2.8 or faster (with a few exceptions) and if you’re manually picking your points. To make things simpler, or easier, based on the current subject matter, the available points to choose from can be changed from all 45 points to 19 points, to 11, to 9. The Mark IV also provides several of the tricks found on the EOS 7D, like the ability to change a focal point to a smaller point (spot focus) for precision focusing, as well as the ability to store focal points in memory based on camera orientation. Focusing was fast and reliable with a variety of lenses, and the Mark IV easily focused in low light areas where the EOS 5D Mark II wouldn’t.
Given the issues raised with the EOS 1D Mark III, clearly the focus on the Mark IV is with its AI Servo functionality, and on that note, I feel reasonably secure in saying that most photographers will find it better than the Mark III, and close to the Nikon D3s. The problem is “out of the box” performance. The Mark IV’s AF system is substantially effected by a number of custom function settings, many of them confusing to make sense of exactly, but it’s important to get a grasp on the exact nature and effect of each of the custom functions, because setting them properly will greatly improve AF performance, relative to specific events and lighting conditions. Set properly, I found the AF system to work very well. The Mark IV would quickly “lock on” to targets, and tracking results were impressive. In our several opportunities to shoot sports events I managed high percentages of in focus shots. Where the shots were out of focus, I can honestly say that most were user error, either from poor tracking, or over eagerness (firing before following).
Note that above I said, “close to the Nikon D3s”. The reason for saying this is that the Mark IV seems much more reliant on getting custom functions right than the D3/D3s. Set properly the two cameras produce similar results, but the D3s makes it easier out of the box in my opinion. So perhaps the Mark IV is a “smarter” camera, either way I got nearly identical focusing results from the two cameras, which is saying a lot given the D3s’ capabilities. In the end I’d be comfortable with either camera on the sidelines of the “big game”, but I’ll confess that if my life depended on getting “the shot” I’d probably pick up the Nikon D3s.

But don’t get me wrong, the Mark IV inspires a great deal of confidence, and in general use, be it the field, the studio, or the sidelines, the Mark IV is an outright workhorse. It may require more “homework” to dial in results (specifically in regards to AI Servo AF) but the extra work is well worth the results.