Several big announcements today...
Canon 5D Mark IV sports the familiar clean and classic lines of the series
Canon introduces the 5D Mark IV. The latest iteration of the famous 5D series, once known as the ultimate amateur Canon DSLR but now preferred by professionals as much as by amateurs, has three of the four improvements on the wish-list of PDN (formerly Photo District News) from a year back: 4k video, USB 3.0, and Dual Pixel CMOS AF (ideal for low-light focusing). Missing is the 10-FPS burst mode they wanted, and still TBD (to be determined) is what most 5D Mark III users were asking for: at least two stops more of dynamic range.
The new body features a 30.4-megapixel CMOS sensor with a Dual-Pixel raw mode that allows you to shoot raw files with double the resolution of a standard 30-MP file.
There are two new Canon EF lenses: the Canon EF 16–35mm ƒ/2.8L III USM ultra-wide zoom which will cost $2,199, and the Canon EF 24–105mm ƒ/4L IS II USM standard zoom for $1,099.
The Canon EOS 5D Mark IV ships in September and can be pre-ordered now for $3,499.
Fuji XF 23mm ƒ/2 with its snoot-type (inward-sloping) rangefinder-style hood
Fuji introduces the XF 23mm ƒ/2. A slower but also smaller version of Fuji's wide-normal lens, the long-expected and eagerly awaited 23mm ƒ/2 is optimized for the X-Pro2 (it will make the camera less front-heavy and won't get in the way of the viewfinder in optical mode). Of course it can be used on any Fuji X camera. Available for pre-order in silver or black, the lens costs $449.
Still TBD: whether the new lens will be as nice as the near-flawless XF 23mm ƒ/1.4.
Also, don't forget that many Fuji items are on sale right now and that Fuji prices will undergo an across-the-board price increase in September.
Mike
Original contents copyright 2016 by Michael C. Johnston and/or the bylined author. All Rights Reserved. Links in this post may be to our affiliates; sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Like what you read?
Join our support campaign or buy something
(To see all the comments, click on the "Comments" link below.)
Featured Comments from:
No featured comments yet—please check back soon!
Some also hoped for better weather sealing on the 5D IV, and it seems to have happened....pending user experience.
Posted by: Jeff | Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 03:30 PM
I hope this hood is part of a trend that continues.
On the advice of a friend, I bought one designed for the Panny 20/1.7. For whatever reason(s), Panny doesn't make hoods for the 20/1.7 and 14/2.5.
The couple of third party conventional hoods I've tried worked OK, but are enormous and obtrusive on these small to tiny lenses. This reverse/snoot style hood works as well, and slips easily into a pocket with camera and lens. A one person effort that was expensive, although very nicely made.
It seems the designer was cautious with opening size (to fit a 30 mm filter thread) and hood depth. As a result, it also works with the 14/2.5, without vignetting.
Taking a couple of $ flier, I found that a generic 37=>30 mm step down ring, while less elegant looking, works well as a hood for the 20/1.7.
Posted by: Moose | Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 04:13 PM
Out of curiosity, are there any tradeoffs with this rangefinder-style inwardly-sloping lens design, compared to SLR-style lenses?
Posted by: Euan Forrester | Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 07:14 PM
Wifi. Wifi on all cameras. I'm confused anytime they announce a camera without a reliable, fast way to transmit my photos wirelessly. It's got gps and wifi plus some other nice things.
Posted by: Josh Hawkins | Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 08:45 PM
Thank you for the pre-order link - done!
Posted by: Darlene | Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 09:36 PM
This concludes the marketing portion of our show... I jest Mike. Everyone needs clicks. If I buy a Mk IV, the purchase will originate from your site out of loyalty to your gestalt. While we may disagree from time to time, you have added to the things in life I appreciate, and that's worthy of my fidelity. Every day I look for new stuff on your blog, and I am often rewarded. You are a valuable commodity.
Posted by: Jim Allen | Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 10:52 PM
Mmm as far as I understand it 'double pixel raw' gives the ability to adjust bokeh, flare and micro focus slightly in post using Canon's own DPP software. It does double the size of the raw file though.
Posted by: IvanMuller | Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 11:49 PM
This lens would be the one that could tempt me to buy a Fuji!
Posted by: IvanMuller | Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 11:51 PM
Word on the street is that the new Fuji 23 mm f/2 is not as optically spectacular as 23 mm f/1.4 (that would be a tough ask) but it has excellent image quality, very sharp with very fast AF, and nice bokeh qualities. Seems like a steal for $450.
Check out some fine images by medical doctor and Fuji X photographer Jonas Rask:
https://jonasraskphotography.com/2016/08/25/23-and-2-a-small-look-at-the-fujifilm-xf-23mm-f2-wr/
Posted by: Stephen Scharf | Thursday, 25 August 2016 at 11:53 PM
@ Euan Forrester
Inwardly-sloping (snoot) lens shades is a variation of "vented" shades/hoods designed not to block the RF window or finder. The trade-off is vignetting when used with wide to normal lenses. Outward-flaring shades will partially block most built-in pop-up flashes of digital bodies causing shadowing.
Posted by: Sarge | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 03:34 AM
Moose wrote:
"Taking a couple of $ flier, I found that a generic 37=>30 mm step down ring, while less elegant looking, works well as a hood for the 20/1.7."
I do a similar thing on my Fuji 35/1.4 with a 52–37mm step-down ring and it works great: keeps stray fingers away from the glass, and adds almost no size to the lens.
Posted by: Andy F | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 05:30 AM
Couldn't we call this medium format?
Posted by: CharlieH | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 06:53 AM
Moose, have a look at the B + W #900 rubber lens hood. In its 46mm version its a perfect fit for the Panasonic 1.7/20mm. Its been on my lens for years without any problem.
Posted by: Alex | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 07:25 AM
So far it appears the new Canon is missing one major thing many of us want. Dynamic Range to match or exceed what Nikon and Sony has.
What is wrong with Canon?
Posted by: Daniel | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 07:48 AM
And what's the objective basis for stating that the dynamic range is a "fail"? As far as I'm aware the camera hasn't even shipped yet.
[And who said that? Not I. --Mike]
Posted by: ColinW | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 10:33 AM
I'd like Fuji to make a series of slower pancakes. I love the size of the 27mm f2.8 but the focal length is a little too betwixt and between for me. But I probably will spring for the new 23 - the 23 f1.4 is just a monster, defeats the compact size factor of the X cams for me. I already have a D800 for when I want to poke huge lenses in peoples' faces
Posted by: Alan Fairley | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 10:51 AM
I have an aging X100s that I've been thinking about updating (it was the camera that got me into Fuji), and now the first shoe has dropped with the 23 f/2 that is small enough on my X-T1 that I maybe don't need the X100s replacement. I'll probably wait for the other shoe to drop and see what the follow on to the X100T is before buying though.
The EVF in the X-T1 is so good that the optical viewfinder in the X100s feels like a step back, something I never would have thought when I first got it. I've been really enjoying the 35 f/2 and now don't bother with the 35 f/1.4 that I also have. If the new 23 is at last as good as the lens on the X100s then I probably won't bother with an X100 replacement either...
Posted by: Adam Richardson | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 11:45 AM
Dual-Pixel AF does output a raw file which is twice a large, but it does NOT "double the resolution" !!!
Posted by: Bill Pelzmann | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 12:15 PM
Massive dynamic range has never been a major thing for my photography, nor I suspect for most, as the 5D III is the best selling FF SLR.
Posted by: Chris | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 12:45 PM
The '"must have" element of the Fujinon 23mm f2 is likely to be its focusing speed. The 35mm f2 is as quiet and quick as their excellent zooms, quite unlike any of their f1.4 lenses. The 35mm f2 works well with the XT1 and XT10 CAF focus modes, so here's hoping that the new 23mm is similar.
Posted by: Dave Wilson | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 04:33 PM
Euan asks: "Out of curiosity, are there any tradeoffs with this rangefinder-style inwardly-sloping lens design, compared to SLR-style lenses?"
The main constraint it puts on the design is the obvious one: the front element can't be "too big". That constrains maximum aperture (and how much vignetting you'll accept near maximum aperture). So this mechanical design would only work well for "slower" lenses so this lens is an f/2 rather than a sub-f/2 lens. Compare with the 23mm f/1.4 which is a chunky lens at the front.
http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n160825_02.html
In this design the front and rear lens elements are about the same diameter.
The other issue is this is a APS-C lens so if they can keep all the other electromechanical hardware away from the front of the lens they can make the lens narrower at the front.
Similar constraints occur in the design of the X100 series lens (except they can be mounted closer to the sensor as the lens is fixed). The front element is smaller and the element size grows as you move towards the sensor.
http://www.finepix-x100.com/en/story
A similar idea appears in the Olympus XA film compact where lens length was the major constraint. They wanted the camera to be "not much thicker" than the 135 film canister and to avoid using a retracting lens. This resulted in a similarly arranged (but simpler 6-element, 5-group) 35mm f/2.8 lens with a small front element and larger elements inside the camera.
http://www.diaxa.com/xa.htm
Posted by: Kevin Purcell | Friday, 26 August 2016 at 07:50 PM
"I love the size of the 27mm f2.8 but the focal length is a little too betwixt and between for me."
Both Mike and I vigorously defend that focal length as "Goldilocks!"
Posted by: Earl Dunbar | Saturday, 27 August 2016 at 11:10 AM